CNAL.L vs. PACW.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CNAL.L (Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR) and PACW.L (Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income) are both exchange-traded funds - CNAL.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while PACW.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the Solactive GBS Global Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CNAL.L returned 39.01% vs 30.63% for PACW.L. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNAL.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for PACW.L.

Performance

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

CNAL.L is traded in GBp, while PACW.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the PACW.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNAL.L achieves a 9.67% return, which is significantly lower than PACW.L's 11.96% return.

CNAL.L

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 3.12%
• YTD: 9.67%
• 6M: 13.01%
• 1Y: 39.01%
• 3Y*: 8.19%
• 5Y*: 0.10%
• 10Y*: —

PACW.L

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: 5.84%
• YTD: 11.96%
• 6M: 12.58%
• 1Y: 30.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CNAL.L Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR	9.67%	15.77%
PACW.L Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income	11.96%	9.58%

Correlation

The correlation between CNAL.L and PACW.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025	0.34

Return for Risk

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CNAL.L

CNAL.L Risk / Return Rank: 80
CNAL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
CNAL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
CNAL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
CNAL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CNAL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 81

PACW.L

PACW.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
PACW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
PACW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
PACW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
PACW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
PACW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	CNAL.L	PACW.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.51	2.93	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.35	3.99	-0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.56	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.62	4.32	+1.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.97	17.62	-1.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNAL.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is comparable to the PACW.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNAL.L and PACW.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CNAL.L	PACW.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.51	2.93	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.01	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	1.24	-0.90

Drawdowns

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNAL.L drawdown since its inception was -44.83%, which is greater than PACW.L's maximum drawdown of -17.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNAL.L and PACW.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNAL.L	PACW.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.83%	-17.68%	-27.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.91%	-7.06%	+0.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.58%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.19%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.69%	-0.43%	-10.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.41%	-3.03%	-18.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.44%	1.73%	+0.71%

Volatility

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) has a higher volatility of 5.46% compared to Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L) at 2.93%. This indicates that CNAL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PACW.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNAL.L	PACW.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.46%	2.93%	+2.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.60%	7.75%	+2.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.54%	10.45%	+5.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.36%	13.93%	+17.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.10%	13.93%	+26.17%

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNAL.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than PACW.L's 0.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNAL.L vs. PACW.L - Dividend Comparison

CNAL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PACW.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%.

Position	TTM
CNAL.L Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR	0.00%
PACW.L Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income	1.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNAL.L and PACW.L in my portfolio?

CNAL.L and PACW.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNAL.L or PACW.L?

On fees, PACW.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNAL.L or PACW.L?

PACW.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNAL.L.

What is the main difference between CNAL.L and PACW.L?

CNAL.L is categorized as China Equities, while PACW.L is Global Equities. CNAL.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while PACW.L tracks Solactive GBS Global Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNAL.L and 0.07% for PACW.L.