CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L
CNEW.L (VanEck New China UCITS ETF) and FLXC.L (Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds - CNEW.L tracks the MarketGrader New China Screened Index while FLXC.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNEW.L returned 1.29%/yr vs 8.62%/yr for FLXC.L. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNEW.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLXC.L.
Performance
CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNEW.L achieves a -6.01% return, which is significantly higher than FLXC.L's -8.35% return.
CNEW.L
- 1D
- 2.09%
- 1M
- -1.23%
- 6M
- -10.84%
- YTD
- -6.01%
- 1Y
- 1.38%
- 3Y*
- 1.29%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FLXC.L
- 1D
- 1.78%
- 1M
- -1.33%
- 6M
- -12.83%
- YTD
- -8.35%
- 1Y
- 0.10%
- 3Y*
- 8.62%
- 5Y*
- -4.32%
- 10Y*
- —
CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNEW.L VanEck New China UCITS ETF | -6.01% | 23.92% | -0.36% | -9.27% | -28.05% | 6.19% |
FLXC.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF | -8.35% | 32.15% | 19.39% | -12.76% | -23.03% | -5.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNEW.L and FLXC.L is 0.82, 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 | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2021 | 0.79 |
The correlation between CNEW.L and FLXC.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.82 - 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
CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L — Risk / Return Rank
CNEW.L
FLXC.L
CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck New China UCITS ETF (CNEW.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.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 | FLXC.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.02 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.08 | 0.00 | +0.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.18 | 0.01 | +0.17 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNEW.L drawdown since its inception was -46.53%, smaller than the maximum FLXC.L drawdown of -61.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNEW.L and FLXC.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNEW.L | FLXC.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.53% | -61.74% | +15.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.41% | -21.43% | +5.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.03% | -25.43% | -2.60% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -52.70% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.46% | -35.12% | +10.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.53% | -31.72% | +5.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.75% | 9.74% | -1.99% |
Volatility
CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L - Volatility Comparison
VanEck New China UCITS ETF (CNEW.L) has a higher volatility of 5.71% compared to Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) at 5.29%. This indicates that CNEW.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLXC.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNEW.L | FLXC.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.71% | 5.29% | +0.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.83% | 13.77% | -0.94% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.60% | 19.09% | -1.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.24% | 28.40% | -3.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.24% | 27.19% | -1.95% |
CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNEW.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than FLXC.L's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNEW.L vs. FLXC.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CNEW.L nor FLXC.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CNEW.L and FLXC.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FLXC.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FLXC.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNEW.L.
CNEW.L tracks MarketGrader New China Screened Index, while FLXC.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNEW.L and 0.19% for FLXC.L.
Find the right allocation for CNEW.L and FLXC.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