CNAL.L vs. XX25.L
CNAL.L (Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR) and XX25.L (Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds - CNAL.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY while XX25.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNAL.L returned 5.75%/yr vs 5.07%/yr for XX25.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNAL.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for XX25.L.
Performance
CNAL.L vs. XX25.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CNAL.L having a 13.91% return and XX25.L slightly higher at 14.21%. Over the past 10 years, CNAL.L has outperformed XX25.L with an annualized return of 5.75%, while XX25.L has yielded a comparatively lower 5.07% 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%
XX25.L
- 1D
- 1.79%
- 1M
- 3.91%
- YTD
- 14.21%
- 6M
- 15.14%
- 1Y
- 40.90%
- 3Y*
- 16.17%
- 5Y*
- 0.67%
- 10Y*
- 5.07%
CNAL.L vs. XX25.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% |
XX25.L Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C | 14.21% | 17.72% | 29.08% | -18.23% | -11.14% | -19.11% | 6.62% | 10.00% | -7.19% | 23.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNAL.L and XX25.L is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2014 | 0.72 |
Over the past year, CNAL.L and XX25.L have become more correlated (0.98) than their long-term average of 0.72, meaning their price movements have been converging.
CNAL.L vs. XX25.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Energy
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Financial Services
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Industrials
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Basic Materials
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Consumer Defensive
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Consumer Cyclical
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Healthcare
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Utilities
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Energy
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Communication Services
CNAL.L
XX25.L
Real Estate
CNAL.L
XX25.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. XX25.L — Risk / Return Rank
CNAL.L
XX25.L
CNAL.L vs. XX25.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 Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (XX25.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 | XX25.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.43 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.83 | 5.64 | +0.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.58 | 15.72 | -0.14 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNAL.L vs. XX25.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNAL.L drawdown since its inception was -51.00%, smaller than the maximum XX25.L drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNAL.L and XX25.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNAL.L | XX25.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.00% | -99.38% | +48.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.91% | -7.21% | +0.30% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.58% | -35.85% | +9.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.38% | -47.66% | +5.28% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.10% | -54.65% | +9.55% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.42% | -16.42% | +9.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.81% | -40.78% | +13.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.59% | 2.59% | 0.00% |
Volatility
CNAL.L vs. XX25.L - Volatility Comparison
Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) and Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (XX25.L) have volatilities of 6.16% and 6.09%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNAL.L | XX25.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.16% | 6.09% | +0.07% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.48% | 11.53% | -0.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.40% | 16.52% | -0.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.50% | 30.20% | -8.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.94% | 26.10% | -4.16% |
CNAL.L vs. XX25.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNAL.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than XX25.L's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNAL.L vs. XX25.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CNAL.L nor XX25.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.98, CNAL.L and XX25.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, CNAL.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNAL.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for XX25.L.
CNAL.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while XX25.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNAL.L and 0.60% for XX25.L.
Find the right allocation for CNAL.L and XX25.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