PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CNQQ vs. ISVBF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNQQ achieves a 0.42% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -6.13% return.


CNQQ

1D
-1.06%
1M
-5.82%
6M
-0.67%
YTD
0.42%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*

ISVBF

1D
1.03%
1M
9.78%
6M
-8.67%
YTD
-6.13%
1Y
1.35%
3Y*
8.69%
5Y*
-2.35%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
-4.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$683.34K$447.18K$510.19K
$136.08K$258.28K$313.33K

CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CNQQ and ISVBF is 0.51, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2025

0.51

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

CNQQ vs. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CNQQ

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.


ISVBF
ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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.


CNQQISVBFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.12

CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNQQ drawdown since its inception was -17.82%, smaller than the maximum ISVBF drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQQ and ISVBF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CNQQISVBFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.82%

-53.78%

+35.96%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-46.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.00%

-23.92%

+10.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.58%

-32.57%

+23.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.18%

Volatility

CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CNQQISVBFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.73%

31.66%

-3.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.73%

30.08%

-2.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.73%

30.07%

-2.34%

CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNQQ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison

CNQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


CNQQ and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.

CNQQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.40%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.

CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNQQ and 0.40% for ISVBF.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNQQ and ISVBF

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