PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L) and ICBC Credit Suisse UCITS ETF SICAV - ICBCCS WisdomTree S&P China 500 UCITS ETF (CHIN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CNUA.L is traded in GBp, while CHIN.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CHIN.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNUA.L achieves a 11.84% return, which is significantly higher than CHIN.L's 6.14% return.


CNUA.L

1D
-0.68%
1M
2.91%
YTD
11.84%
6M
15.17%
1Y
44.25%
3Y*
12.83%
5Y*
3.76%
10Y*

CHIN.L

1D
-0.16%
1M
1.55%
YTD
6.14%
6M
6.71%
1Y
30.73%
3Y*
10.73%
5Y*
-0.73%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
CNUA.L
UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc
11.84%22.98%16.55%-16.32%-15.85%10.51%38.62%
CHIN.L
ICBC Credit Suisse UCITS ETF SICAV - ICBCCS WisdomTree S&P China 500 UCITS ETF
6.14%23.12%16.56%-17.87%-16.32%-8.88%27.61%

Correlation

The correlation between CNUA.L and CHIN.L is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.77

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2020

0.75

The correlation between CNUA.L and CHIN.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CNUA.L
CHIN.L

Technology

27.2%
25.1%

Financial Services

18.8%
14.7%

Industrials

15.7%
14.6%

Basic Materials

12.4%
10.9%

Consumer Defensive

7.4%
4.0%

Consumer Cyclical

5.6%
12.8%

Healthcare

4.3%
5.7%

Energy

3.4%
2.4%

Utilities

3.2%
2.3%

Communication Services

1.4%
6.5%

Real Estate

0.6%
1.0%

Technology

CNUA.L
27.2%
CHIN.L
25.1%

Financial Services

CNUA.L
18.8%
CHIN.L
14.7%

Industrials

CNUA.L
15.7%
CHIN.L
14.6%

Basic Materials

CNUA.L
12.4%
CHIN.L
10.9%

Consumer Defensive

CNUA.L
7.4%
CHIN.L
4.0%

Consumer Cyclical

CNUA.L
5.6%
CHIN.L
12.8%

Healthcare

CNUA.L
4.3%
CHIN.L
5.7%

Energy

CNUA.L
3.4%
CHIN.L
2.4%

Utilities

CNUA.L
3.2%
CHIN.L
2.3%

Communication Services

CNUA.L
1.4%
CHIN.L
6.5%

Real Estate

CNUA.L
0.6%
CHIN.L
1.0%

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

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNUA.L
CNUA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNUA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNUA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
CNUA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNUA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

CHIN.L
CHIN.L Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
CHIN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CHIN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
CHIN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
CHIN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
CHIN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L) and ICBC Credit Suisse UCITS ETF SICAV - ICBCCS WisdomTree S&P China 500 UCITS ETF (CHIN.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.


CNUA.LCHIN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.30

+0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.63

3.45

+3.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.91

8.91

+11.00

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.84, which is higher than the CHIN.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNUA.L and CHIN.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CNUA.LCHIN.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.84

1.70

+1.13

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.18

-0.03

+0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.41

0.25

+0.16

Drawdowns

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNUA.L drawdown since its inception was -38.31%, smaller than the maximum CHIN.L drawdown of -51.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNUA.L and CHIN.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CNUA.LCHIN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.31%

-51.47%

+13.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.64%

-8.86%

+2.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.43%

-22.61%

+1.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.31%

-43.94%

+5.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.17%

-17.57%

+15.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.93%

-20.61%

+5.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.22%

3.44%

-1.22%

Volatility

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L) is 5.67%, while ICBC Credit Suisse UCITS ETF SICAV - ICBCCS WisdomTree S&P China 500 UCITS ETF (CHIN.L) has a volatility of 6.13%. This indicates that CNUA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CHIN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CNUA.LCHIN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.67%

6.13%

-0.46%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.52%

12.62%

-2.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.52%

17.98%

-2.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.25%

23.28%

-2.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.74%

22.47%

+0.27%

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNUA.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CHIN.L's 0.55% expense ratio.


Dividends

CNUA.L vs. CHIN.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNUA.L nor CHIN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CHIN.L
ICBC Credit Suisse UCITS ETF SICAV - ICBCCS WisdomTree S&P China 500 UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%1.33%1.01%1.19%2.38%
CNUA.L
UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CNUA.L and CHIN.L have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CNUA.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CNUA.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CHIN.L.

CNUA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while CHIN.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: UBS and ICBC Credit Suisse Asset Management. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for CNUA.L and 0.55% for CHIN.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNUA.L and CHIN.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