CNYA vs. AAA
CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) and AAA (AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNYA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while AAA is a CLO fund actively managed by Alternative Access Funds LLC. CNYA is passively managed, while AAA is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNYA returned -1.67%/yr vs 4.62%/yr for AAA. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. CNYA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AAA.
Performance
CNYA vs. AAA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNYA achieves a 4.11% return, which is significantly higher than AAA's 1.84% return.
CNYA
- 1D
- -0.99%
- 1M
- -4.23%
- YTD
- 4.11%
- 6M
- 6.49%
- 1Y
- 30.18%
- 3Y*
- 9.91%
- 5Y*
- -1.67%
- 10Y*
- —
AAA
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.49%
- YTD
- 1.84%
- 6M
- 2.37%
- 1Y
- 5.15%
- 3Y*
- 6.44%
- 5Y*
- 4.62%
- 10Y*
- —
CNYA vs. AAA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 4.11% | 26.48% | 10.78% | -13.76% | -26.51% | 3.53% | 17.76% |
AAA AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF | 1.84% | 4.92% | 6.85% | 8.94% | 0.15% | 0.86% | 0.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNYA and AAA is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2020 | -0.01 |
The correlation between CNYA and AAA shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (all time) to 0.11 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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 vs. AAA — Risk / Return Rank
CNYA
AAA
CNYA vs. AAA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF (AAA). 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.
| CNYA | AAA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.54 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.44 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.99 | 8.58 | -4.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.48 | 26.34 | -14.87 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CNYA | AAA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.71 | 2.25 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.07 | 2.04 | -2.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 1.92 | -1.67 |
Drawdowns
CNYA vs. AAA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNYA drawdown since its inception was -49.49%, which is greater than AAA's maximum drawdown of -2.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYA and AAA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNYA | AAA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.49% | -2.63% | -46.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.59% | -0.60% | -6.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.35% | -2.40% | -30.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.65% | -2.63% | -42.02% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.53% | -0.24% | -17.29% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.68% | -0.30% | -20.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.64% | 0.20% | +2.44% |
Volatility
CNYA vs. AAA - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a higher volatility of 6.87% compared to AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF (AAA) at 0.73%. This indicates that CNYA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AAA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNYA | AAA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.87% | 0.73% | +6.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.79% | 1.77% | +11.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.73% | 2.30% | +15.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.85% | 2.28% | +21.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.57% | 2.15% | +21.42% |
CNYA vs. AAA - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNYA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than AAA's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNYA vs. AAA - Dividend Comparison
CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, less than AAA's 4.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAA AAF First Priority CLO Bond ETF | 4.90% | 5.11% | 6.17% | 6.11% | 2.78% | 1.06% | 0.32% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 1.84% | 1.92% | 2.51% | 4.23% | 2.69% | 1.11% | 1.06% | 1.21% | 3.92% | 0.97% | 1.38% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNYA and AAA have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CNYA has higher volatility (6.87%) compared to AAA (0.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNYA dropped -49.49% vs AAA's -2.63%.
On 5-year performance, AAA leads with 4.62% vs -1.67% for CNYA. On fees, AAA is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, AAA has been the lower-risk option at 0.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, AAA has performed better with a 4.62% return vs -1.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AAA is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNYA.
AAA has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 1.84% for CNYA.
CNYA is categorized as China Equities, while AAA is CLO. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Alternative Access Funds LLC. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNYA and 0.25% for AAA.
AAA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 1.71), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for CNYA and AAA
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