CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNIE.DE (VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A) and L4K3.DE (Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds - CNIE.DE tracks the MarketGrader New China ESG while L4K3.DE tracks the MSCI China. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNIE.DE returned -0.19%/yr vs 8.01%/yr for L4K3.DE. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNIE.DE charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for L4K3.DE.

Performance

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A (CNIE.DE) and Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF Acc (L4K3.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNIE.DE achieves a -3.41% return, which is significantly higher than L4K3.DE's -6.67% return.

CNIE.DE

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: -3.01%
• YTD: -3.41%
• 6M: -5.32%
• 1Y: 6.61%
• 3Y*: -0.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

L4K3.DE

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: -3.46%
• YTD: -6.67%
• 6M: -9.21%
• 1Y: 2.64%
• 3Y*: 8.01%
• 5Y*: -4.01%
• 10Y*: —

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

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CNIE.DE VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A	-3.41%	8.76%	7.28%	-12.40%	-22.84%	8.74%
L4K3.DE Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF Acc	-6.67%	17.15%	27.30%	-14.42%	-14.90%	-5.47%

Correlation

The correlation between CNIE.DE and L4K3.DE is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2021	0.76

The correlation between CNIE.DE and L4K3.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNIE.DE

CNIE.DE Risk / Return Rank: 15
CNIE.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
CNIE.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
CNIE.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 15
CNIE.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
CNIE.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 15

L4K3.DE

L4K3.DE Risk / Return Rank: 11
L4K3.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
L4K3.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
L4K3.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 12
L4K3.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
L4K3.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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.

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A (CNIE.DE) and Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF Acc (L4K3.DE). 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.

	CNIE.DE	L4K3.DE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.42	0.11	+0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.68	0.39	+0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.06	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.53	0.12	+0.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.17	0.21	+0.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNIE.DE Sharpe Ratio is 0.42, which is higher than the L4K3.DE Sharpe Ratio of 0.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNIE.DE and L4K3.DE, 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

	CNIE.DE	L4K3.DE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42	0.11	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.14	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.16	0.02	-0.19

Drawdowns

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNIE.DE drawdown since its inception was -45.69%, smaller than the maximum L4K3.DE drawdown of -55.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNIE.DE and L4K3.DE.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNIE.DE	L4K3.DE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.69%	-55.69%	+10.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.45%	-25.74%	+13.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.20%	-25.74%	-3.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-49.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.25%	-31.32%	+6.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.67%	-28.02%	+3.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.70%	15.28%	-9.58%

Volatility

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A (CNIE.DE) is 4.49%, while Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF Acc (L4K3.DE) has a volatility of 7.29%. This indicates that CNIE.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than L4K3.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNIE.DE	L4K3.DE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.49%	7.29%	-2.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.68%	13.24%	-2.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.04%	27.86%	-11.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.27%	29.30%	-5.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.27%	28.03%	-3.76%

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNIE.DE has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than L4K3.DE's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNIE.DE vs. L4K3.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNIE.DE nor L4K3.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNIE.DE and L4K3.DE in my portfolio?

CNIE.DE and L4K3.DE have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNIE.DE or L4K3.DE?

On fees, L4K3.DE is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNIE.DE or L4K3.DE?

L4K3.DE is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNIE.DE.

What is the main difference between CNIE.DE and L4K3.DE?

CNIE.DE tracks MarketGrader New China ESG, while L4K3.DE tracks MSCI China. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNIE.DE and 0.29% for L4K3.DE.