CNEG.L vs. 500G.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNEG.L (Amundi MSCI China ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR (C)) and 500G.L (Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - CNEG.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China NR USD, while 500G.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNEG.L returned 4.28%/yr vs 19.12%/yr for 500G.L. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNEG.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for 500G.L.

Performance

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI China ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR (C) (CNEG.L) and Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNEG.L achieves a -8.89% return, which is significantly lower than 500G.L's 10.57% return.

CNEG.L

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -0.44%
• YTD: -8.89%
• 6M: -10.31%
• 1Y: 3.32%
• 3Y*: 4.28%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

500G.L

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 5.53%
• YTD: 10.57%
• 6M: 10.49%
• 1Y: 29.21%
• 3Y*: 19.12%
• 5Y*: 15.05%
• 10Y*: 16.24%

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

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CNEG.L Amundi MSCI China ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR (C)	-8.89%	23.90%	11.58%	-14.99%	-20.05%	-6.75%
500G.L Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc	10.57%	9.44%	27.44%	19.89%	-8.86%	2.23%

Correlation

The correlation between CNEG.L and 500G.L is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2021	0.26

Return for Risk

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNEG.L

CNEG.L Risk / Return Rank: 11
CNEG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
CNEG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
CNEG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 11
CNEG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
CNEG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 10

500G.L

500G.L Risk / Return Rank: 82
500G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
500G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
500G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 85
500G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
500G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI China ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR (C) (CNEG.L) and Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.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.

	CNEG.L	500G.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.16	2.76	-2.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.38	3.61	-3.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.51	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.16	4.08	-3.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.32	15.27	-14.95
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNEG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.16, which is lower than the 500G.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNEG.L and 500G.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

	CNEG.L	500G.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16	2.76	-2.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.05	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.05	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.16	1.07	-1.23

Drawdowns

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNEG.L drawdown since its inception was -46.55%, which is greater than 500G.L's maximum drawdown of -25.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNEG.L and 500G.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNEG.L	500G.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.55%	-25.52%	-21.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.54%	-7.12%	-13.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.84%	-21.12%	-5.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.12%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-25.52%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.79%	-0.22%	-22.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.63%	-3.29%	-23.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.43%	1.91%	+8.52%

Volatility

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI China ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR (C) (CNEG.L) has a higher volatility of 7.88% compared to Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.L) at 2.65%. This indicates that CNEG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than 500G.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNEG.L	500G.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.88%	2.65%	+5.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.68%	7.13%	+7.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.42%	10.55%	+9.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.48%	14.31%	+17.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.48%	15.54%	+15.94%

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNEG.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than 500G.L's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNEG.L vs. 500G.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNEG.L nor 500G.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNEG.L and 500G.L in my portfolio?

CNEG.L and 500G.L have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNEG.L or 500G.L?

On fees, 500G.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNEG.L or 500G.L?

500G.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNEG.L.

What is the main difference between CNEG.L and 500G.L?

CNEG.L is categorized as China Equities, while 500G.L is S&P 500. CNEG.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while 500G.L tracks S&P 500. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNEG.L and 0.15% for 500G.L.