CNEW.L vs. RQFI.L
CNEW.L (VanEck New China UCITS ETF) and RQFI.L (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D) are both China Equities funds - CNEW.L tracks the MarketGrader New China Screened Index while RQFI.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 11.08%/yr for RQFI.L. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CNEW.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for RQFI.L.
Performance
CNEW.L vs. RQFI.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CNEW.L is traded in USD, while RQFI.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the RQFI.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 RQFI.L's 7.40% return.
CNEW.L
- 1D
- 2.09%
- 1M
- -1.23%
- 6M
- -10.84%
- YTD
- -6.01%
- 1Y
- 1.38%
- 3Y*
- 1.29%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RQFI.L
- 1D
- 0.53%
- 1M
- -1.60%
- 6M
- 5.16%
- YTD
- 7.40%
- 1Y
- 29.27%
- 3Y*
- 11.08%
- 5Y*
- -0.42%
- 10Y*
- 5.12%
CNEW.L vs. RQFI.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% |
RQFI.L Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D | 7.40% | 27.41% | 13.32% | -13.73% | -27.09% | 5.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNEW.L and RQFI.L is 0.80, 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 | 0.80 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2021 | 0.83 |
The correlation between CNEW.L and RQFI.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.83 - 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. RQFI.L — Risk / Return Rank
CNEW.L
RQFI.L
CNEW.L vs. RQFI.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck New China UCITS ETF (CNEW.L) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.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 | RQFI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.29 | -0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.08 | 3.92 | -3.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.18 | 11.02 | -10.84 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNEW.L vs. RQFI.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNEW.L drawdown since its inception was -46.53%, smaller than the maximum RQFI.L drawdown of -50.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNEW.L and RQFI.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNEW.L | RQFI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.53% | -50.90% | +4.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.41% | -7.44% | -8.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.03% | -27.19% | -0.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -44.09% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -50.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.46% | -16.24% | -8.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.53% | -31.14% | +4.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.75% | 2.65% | +5.10% |
Volatility
CNEW.L vs. RQFI.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck New China UCITS ETF (CNEW.L) is 5.71%, while Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) has a volatility of 8.07%. This indicates that CNEW.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RQFI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNEW.L | RQFI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.71% | 8.07% | -2.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.83% | 13.01% | -0.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.60% | 17.35% | +0.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.24% | 22.23% | +3.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.24% | 22.47% | +2.77% |
CNEW.L vs. RQFI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNEW.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than RQFI.L's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNEW.L vs. RQFI.L - Dividend Comparison
CNEW.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RQFI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.48%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNEW.L VanEck New China UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RQFI.L Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D | 1.48% | 1.77% | 1.46% | 1.99% | 1.88% | 0.93% | 1.26% | 0.76% | 2.23% | 1.92% | 1.69% | 0.37% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNEW.L and RQFI.L have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNEW.L is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNEW.L is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for RQFI.L.
CNEW.L tracks MarketGrader New China Screened Index, while RQFI.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNEW.L and 0.65% for RQFI.L.
Find the right allocation for CNEW.L and RQFI.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