CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L
CNAL.L (Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR) and SP5L.L (Lyxor S&P 500 UCITS ETF - Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - CNAL.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while SP5L.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNAL.L returned 5.75%/yr vs 13.61%/yr for SP5L.L. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNAL.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for SP5L.L.
Performance
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CNAL.L is traded in GBp, while SP5L.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the SP5L.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 13.91% return, which is significantly higher than SP5L.L's 9.53% return. Over the past 10 years, CNAL.L has underperformed SP5L.L with an annualized return of 5.75%, while SP5L.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.61% annualized return.
CNAL.L
- 1D
- 1.52%
- 1M
- 3.45%
- YTD
- 13.91%
- 6M
- 14.81%
- 1Y
- 40.49%
- 3Y*
- 12.02%
- 5Y*
- 0.80%
- 10Y*
- 5.75%
SP5L.L
- 1D
- -1.07%
- 1M
- -0.10%
- YTD
- 9.53%
- 6M
- 9.69%
- 1Y
- 26.05%
- 3Y*
- 19.28%
- 5Y*
- 14.16%
- 10Y*
- 13.61%
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNAL.L Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR | 13.91% | 17.54% | 12.76% | -18.90% | -17.14% | 4.51% | 37.96% | 32.57% | -26.38% | 11.18% |
SP5L.L Lyxor S&P 500 UCITS ETF - Acc | 9.53% | 9.50% | 27.60% | 19.99% | -8.84% | 31.19% | 13.92% | 26.93% | 1.00% | -5.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNAL.L and SP5L.L is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2014 | 0.28 |
The correlation between CNAL.L and SP5L.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.15 (3 years) to 0.29 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Energy
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Financial Services
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Industrials
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Basic Materials
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Consumer Defensive
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Consumer Cyclical
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Healthcare
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Utilities
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Energy
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Communication Services
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Real Estate
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L — Risk / Return Rank
CNAL.L
SP5L.L
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.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 Lyxor S&P 500 UCITS ETF - Acc (SP5L.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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| CNAL.L | SP5L.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.44 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.83 | 3.60 | +2.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.58 | 12.74 | +2.84 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNAL.L drawdown since its inception was -51.00%, which is greater than SP5L.L's maximum drawdown of -25.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNAL.L and SP5L.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNAL.L | SP5L.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.00% | -25.47% | -25.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.91% | -7.20% | +0.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.58% | -21.12% | -5.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.38% | -21.12% | -21.26% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.10% | -25.47% | -19.63% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.42% | -1.54% | -5.88% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.81% | -5.16% | -21.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.59% | 2.04% | +0.55% |
Volatility
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L - Volatility Comparison
Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) has a higher volatility of 6.16% compared to Lyxor S&P 500 UCITS ETF - Acc (SP5L.L) at 3.75%. This indicates that CNAL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SP5L.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNAL.L | SP5L.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.16% | 3.75% | +2.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.48% | 7.80% | +3.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.40% | 10.97% | +5.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.50% | 18.80% | +2.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.94% | 17.97% | +3.97% |
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNAL.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than SP5L.L's 0.07% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNAL.L vs. SP5L.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CNAL.L nor SP5L.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CNAL.L and SP5L.L have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SP5L.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SP5L.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNAL.L.
CNAL.L is categorized as China Equities, while SP5L.L is S&P 500. CNAL.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while SP5L.L tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNAL.L and 0.07% for SP5L.L.
Find the right allocation for CNAL.L and SP5L.L
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer