CNUA.L vs. WRDA.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNUA.L (UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) and WRDA.L (UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - CNUA.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while WRDA.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CNUA.L returned 44.25% vs 27.42% for WRDA.L. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNUA.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for WRDA.L.

Performance

CNUA.L vs. WRDA.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 UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNUA.L achieves a 11.84% return, which is significantly higher than WRDA.L's 10.16% 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*: —

WRDA.L

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 5.13%
• YTD: 10.16%
• 6M: 10.42%
• 1Y: 27.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CNUA.L UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	11.84%	22.98%	27.20%
WRDA.L UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc	10.16%	12.77%	20.02%

Correlation

The correlation between CNUA.L and WRDA.L is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024	0.21

The correlation between CNUA.L and WRDA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.21 (all time) to 0.31 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CNUA.L vs. WRDA.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: 88
CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CNUA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
CNUA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 84
CNUA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CNUA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 89

WRDA.L

WRDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 84
WRDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
WRDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
WRDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 86
WRDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
WRDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. WRDA.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 UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.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.L	WRDA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.84	2.72	+0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.77	3.72	+0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.52	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.63	4.18	+2.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.91	16.68	+3.23
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.84, which is comparable to the WRDA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNUA.L and WRDA.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

	CNUA.L	WRDA.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.84	2.72	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.18	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	1.51	-1.10

Drawdowns

CNUA.L vs. WRDA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNUA.L drawdown since its inception was -38.31%, which is greater than WRDA.L's maximum drawdown of -18.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNUA.L and WRDA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNUA.L	WRDA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.31%	-18.38%	-19.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.64%	-6.53%	-0.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.43%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.17%	-0.12%	-2.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.93%	-2.27%	-12.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.22%	1.64%	+0.58%

Volatility

CNUA.L vs. WRDA.L - Volatility Comparison

UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L) has a higher volatility of 5.67% compared to UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.L) at 2.49%. This indicates that CNUA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WRDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNUA.L	WRDA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.67%	2.49%	+3.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.52%	7.16%	+3.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.52%	10.03%	+5.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.25%	12.34%	+8.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.74%	12.34%	+10.40%

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

CNUA.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than WRDA.L's 0.06% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNUA.L vs. WRDA.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNUA.L and WRDA.L in my portfolio?

CNUA.L and WRDA.L have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNUA.L or WRDA.L?

On fees, WRDA.L is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNUA.L or WRDA.L?

WRDA.L is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for CNUA.L.

What is the main difference between CNUA.L and WRDA.L?

CNUA.L is categorized as China Equities, while WRDA.L is Global Equities. CNUA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while WRDA.L tracks MSCI World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for CNUA.L and 0.06% for WRDA.L.