CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

CNEW.L (VanEck New China UCITS ETF) and CM5S.L (Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds - CNEW.L tracks the MarketGrader New China Screened Index while CM5S.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNEW.L returned 1.29%/yr vs 22.84%/yr for CM5S.L. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CNEW.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CM5S.L.

Performance

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck New China UCITS ETF (CNEW.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

CNEW.L is traded in USD, while CM5S.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CM5S.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNEW.L achieves a -6.01% return, which is significantly lower than CM5S.L's 17.43% return.

CNEW.L

• 1D: 2.09%
• 1M: -1.23%
• 6M: -10.84%
• YTD: -6.01%
• 1Y: 1.38%
• 3Y*: 1.29%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CM5S.L

• 1D: 2.25%
• 1M: -3.12%
• 6M: 7.76%
• YTD: 17.43%
• 1Y: 15,590.91%
• 3Y*: 22.84%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CNEW.L VanEck New China UCITS ETF	-6.01%	23.92%	-0.36%	-9.27%	0.26%
CM5S.L Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc	17.43%	52.79%	12.39%	-9.50%	-14.14%

Correlation

The correlation between CNEW.L and CM5S.L is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2022	0.82

The correlation between CNEW.L and CM5S.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.82 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNEW.L

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

CM5S.L

CM5S.L Risk / Return Rank: 84
CM5S.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
CM5S.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
CM5S.L Omega Ratio Rank: 100
CM5S.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CM5S.L Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck New China UCITS ETF (CNEW.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.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.

	CNEW.L	CM5S.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.08	0.64	-0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.23	266.21	-265.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.03	93.77	-92.74
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.08	156.36	-156.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.18	503.11	-502.93

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNEW.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.08, which is lower than the CM5S.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNEW.L and CM5S.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.

Drawdowns

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNEW.L drawdown since its inception was -46.53%, smaller than the maximum CM5S.L drawdown of -99.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNEW.L and CM5S.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNEW.L	CM5S.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.53%	-99.28%	+52.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.41%	-99.28%	+82.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.03%	-99.28%	+71.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.46%	-8.92%	-15.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.53%	-17.60%	-8.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.75%	30.86%	-23.11%

Volatility

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck New China UCITS ETF (CNEW.L) is 5.71%, while Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.L) has a volatility of 666.41%. This indicates that CNEW.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CM5S.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNEW.L	CM5S.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.71%	666.41%	-660.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.83%	925.01%	-912.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.60%	24,150.28%	-24,132.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.24%	11,904.00%	-11,878.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.24%	11,904.00%	-11,878.76%

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNEW.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than CM5S.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNEW.L vs. CM5S.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNEW.L nor CM5S.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNEW.L and CM5S.L in my portfolio?

CNEW.L and CM5S.L have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNEW.L or CM5S.L?

On fees, CM5S.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNEW.L or CM5S.L?

CM5S.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNEW.L.

What is the main difference between CNEW.L and CM5S.L?

CNEW.L tracks MarketGrader New China Screened Index, while CM5S.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNEW.L and 0.35% for CM5S.L.