CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L
CNYA.L (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and EIMI.L (iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNYA.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index (Net), while EIMI.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNYA.L returned 5.34%/yr vs 9.25%/yr for EIMI.L. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNYA.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for EIMI.L.
Performance
CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNYA.L achieves a 4.12% return, which is significantly lower than EIMI.L's 18.64% return. Over the past 10 years, CNYA.L has underperformed EIMI.L with an annualized return of 5.34%, while EIMI.L has yielded a comparatively higher 9.25% annualized return.
CNYA.L
- 1D
- -2.16%
- 1M
- -4.94%
- 6M
- 0.97%
- YTD
- 4.12%
- 1Y
- 25.16%
- 3Y*
- 9.63%
- 5Y*
- -1.29%
- 10Y*
- 5.34%
EIMI.L
- 1D
- -0.30%
- 1M
- -6.07%
- 6M
- 13.34%
- YTD
- 18.64%
- 1Y
- 34.63%
- 3Y*
- 19.30%
- 5Y*
- 7.21%
- 10Y*
- 9.25%
CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYA.L iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 4.12% | 26.26% | 11.19% | -14.20% | -26.19% | 3.18% | 42.31% | 34.76% | -26.13% | 30.21% |
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF | 18.64% | 32.16% | 7.36% | 11.03% | -19.67% | -0.65% | 18.80% | 16.37% | -14.18% | 36.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNYA.L and EIMI.L is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.63 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2015 | 0.62 |
The correlation between CNYA.L and EIMI.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L — Risk / Return Rank
CNYA.L
EIMI.L
CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNYA.L) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.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.
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.
| CNYA.L | EIMI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.30 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.13 | 2.72 | +0.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.30 | 8.68 | -0.38 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNYA.L drawdown since its inception was -52.23%, which is greater than EIMI.L's maximum drawdown of -38.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYA.L and EIMI.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNYA.L | EIMI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.23% | -38.73% | -13.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.00% | -12.66% | +4.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.99% | -17.44% | -10.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.56% | -33.69% | -10.87% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -49.31% | -38.73% | -10.58% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.02% | -7.71% | -9.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.14% | -13.92% | -18.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.02% | 3.98% | -0.96% |
Volatility
CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNYA.L) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) have volatilities of 8.85% and 8.59%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNYA.L | EIMI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.85% | 8.59% | +0.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.06% | 19.48% | -4.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.35% | 21.43% | -2.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.90% | 18.83% | +4.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.89% | 19.22% | +3.67% |
CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNYA.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than EIMI.L's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNYA.L vs. EIMI.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CNYA.L nor EIMI.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CNYA.L and EIMI.L have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EIMI.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EIMI.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for CNYA.L.
CNYA.L is categorized as China Equities, while EIMI.L is Emerging Markets Equities. CNYA.L tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index (Net), while EIMI.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CNYA.L and 0.18% for EIMI.L.
Find the right allocation for CNYA.L and EIMI.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