CNSG.L vs. UC15.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNSG.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) and UC15.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both exchange-traded funds - CNSG.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China NR USD, while UC15.L is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS CMCI. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNSG.L returned -5.51%/yr vs 12.77%/yr for UC15.L. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNSG.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for UC15.L.

Performance

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNSG.L achieves a -4.82% return, which is significantly lower than UC15.L's 21.49% return.

CNSG.L

• 1D: -1.91%
• 1M: -0.52%
• YTD: -4.82%
• 6M: -6.30%
• 1Y: 3.32%
• 3Y*: 4.77%
• 5Y*: -5.51%
• 10Y*: —

UC15.L

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: -0.91%
• YTD: 21.49%
• 6M: 22.05%
• 1Y: 32.45%
• 3Y*: 10.32%
• 5Y*: 12.77%
• 10Y*: 9.68%

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

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CNSG.L UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis	-4.82%	15.02%	19.26%	-19.78%	-13.48%	-18.60%	25.87%	2.75%
UC15.L UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	21.49%	2.57%	6.44%	-6.52%	29.97%	36.11%	-2.49%	-1.41%

Correlation

The correlation between CNSG.L and UC15.L is 0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.05
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.14
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2019	0.22

The correlation between CNSG.L and UC15.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (1 year) to 0.22 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNSG.L

CNSG.L Risk / Return Rank: 13
CNSG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
CNSG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
CNSG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 13
CNSG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
CNSG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 13

UC15.L

UC15.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
UC15.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
UC15.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
UC15.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
UC15.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
UC15.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.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.

	CNSG.L	UC15.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.29	2.12	-1.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.50	2.77	-2.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.39	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.34	5.23	-4.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.73	13.93	-13.20
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNSG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.29, which is lower than the UC15.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNSG.L and UC15.L, 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

	CNSG.L	UC15.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29	2.12	-1.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.21	0.87	-1.07
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.66	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.03	0.33	-0.36

Drawdowns

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNSG.L drawdown since its inception was -57.38%, which is greater than UC15.L's maximum drawdown of -42.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNSG.L and UC15.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNSG.L	UC15.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.38%	-42.93%	-14.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.08%	-6.18%	-7.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.72%	-13.98%	-13.74%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.82%	-17.43%	-34.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.26%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.10%	-3.53%	-32.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.15%	-15.17%	-14.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.56%	2.32%	+4.24%

Volatility

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L - Volatility Comparison

UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.L) has a higher volatility of 6.07% compared to UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.L) at 5.07%. This indicates that CNSG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UC15.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNSG.L	UC15.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.07%	5.07%	+1.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.61%	12.34%	-0.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.73%	15.26%	+1.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.90%	14.69%	+12.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.84%	14.80%	+11.04%

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNSG.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than UC15.L's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNSG.L vs. UC15.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNSG.L nor UC15.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNSG.L and UC15.L in my portfolio?

CNSG.L and UC15.L have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNSG.L or UC15.L?

On fees, UC15.L is cheaper at 0.34% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNSG.L or UC15.L?

UC15.L is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CNSG.L.

What is the main difference between CNSG.L and UC15.L?

CNSG.L is categorized as China Equities, while UC15.L is Commodities. CNSG.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while UC15.L tracks UBS CMCI. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CNSG.L and 0.34% for UC15.L.