CNQQ vs. ISVBF
CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds - CNQQ tracks the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech while ISVBF tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNQQ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNQQ achieves a 10.04% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -12.61% return.
CNQQ
- 1D
- -3.47%
- 1M
- 1.11%
- YTD
- 10.04%
- 6M
- 9.35%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ISVBF
- 1D
- -1.91%
- 1M
- -3.63%
- YTD
- -12.61%
- 6M
- -13.33%
- 1Y
- -0.84%
- 3Y*
- 8.82%
- 5Y*
- -6.16%
- 10Y*
- —
CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 10.04% | -5.22% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -12.61% | -5.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNQQ and ISVBF is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2025 | 0.57 |
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
CNQQ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ISVBF
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.
| CNQQ | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.02 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.04 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -0.09 | — |
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
| CNQQ | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.82% | -53.78% | +35.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -20.64% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.77% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -52.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.47% | -29.16% | +25.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.81% | -32.68% | +23.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 9.17% | — |
Volatility
CNQQ vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNQQ | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.35% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 27.04% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.33% | 30.91% | -5.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.33% | 30.31% | -4.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.33% | 30.15% | -4.82% |
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 0.23%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 0.23% | 0.09% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNQQ and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.57, 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 0.23%, 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.
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