PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CNEG.L vs. FRCH.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CNEG.L vs. FRCH.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 Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNEG.L achieves a -8.89% return, which is significantly lower than FRCH.L's -6.14% return.


CNEG.L

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

FRCH.L

1D
-0.31%
1M
-2.10%
YTD
-6.14%
6M
-8.12%
1Y
7.54%
3Y*
8.07%
5Y*
-3.83%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNEG.L vs. FRCH.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CNEG.L
Amundi MSCI China ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR (C)
-8.89%23.90%11.58%-14.99%-20.05%-6.75%
FRCH.L
Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF
-6.14%23.22%21.12%-17.46%-13.83%-6.70%

Correlation

The correlation between CNEG.L and FRCH.L is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.85

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2021

0.88

The correlation between CNEG.L and FRCH.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

CNEG.L vs. FRCH.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: 1111
Overall Rank
CNEG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNEG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNEG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
CNEG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNEG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank

FRCH.L
FRCH.L Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank
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. FRCH.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 Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.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.LFRCH.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.08

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.16

0.48

-0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.32

1.00

-0.68

CNEG.L vs. FRCH.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNEG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.16, which is lower than the FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNEG.L and FRCH.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CNEG.LFRCH.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.16

0.43

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.16

-0.04

-0.11

Drawdowns

CNEG.L vs. FRCH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNEG.L drawdown since its inception was -46.55%, smaller than the maximum FRCH.L drawdown of -56.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNEG.L and FRCH.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CNEG.LFRCH.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.55%

-56.27%

+9.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.54%

-15.77%

-4.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.84%

-29.42%

+2.58%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-49.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.79%

-31.36%

+8.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-26.63%

-29.72%

+3.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.43%

7.53%

+2.90%

Volatility

CNEG.L vs. FRCH.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI China ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR (C) (CNEG.L) has a higher volatility of 7.88% compared to Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) at 6.61%. This indicates that CNEG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FRCH.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CNEG.LFRCH.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.88%

6.61%

+1.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.68%

12.34%

+2.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.42%

17.57%

+2.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.48%

32.60%

-1.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.48%

31.15%

+0.33%

CNEG.L vs. FRCH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNEG.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FRCH.L's 0.19% expense ratio.


Dividends

CNEG.L vs. FRCH.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNEG.L nor FRCH.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CNEG.L and FRCH.L have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FRCH.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FRCH.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNEG.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNEG.L and 0.19% for FRCH.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNEG.L and FRCH.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