PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CNYA vs. ACWI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CNYA vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNYA achieves a 8.91% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 9.86% return. Over the past 10 years, CNYA has underperformed ACWI with an annualized return of 6.50%, while ACWI has yielded a comparatively higher 13.09% annualized return.


CNYA

1D
-2.87%
1M
1.73%
YTD
8.91%
6M
9.76%
1Y
36.56%
3Y*
12.14%
5Y*
-0.49%
10Y*
6.50%

ACWI

1D
-2.00%
1M
-0.35%
YTD
9.86%
6M
9.11%
1Y
25.60%
3Y*
20.00%
5Y*
10.74%
10Y*
13.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNYA vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF
8.91%26.48%10.78%-13.76%-26.51%3.53%41.54%35.95%-26.56%30.99%
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
9.86%22.41%17.45%22.27%-18.39%18.66%16.34%26.59%-9.19%24.33%

Correlation

The correlation between CNYA and ACWI is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.47

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

0.35

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

0.38

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016

0.46

The correlation between CNYA and ACWI shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (3 years) to 0.47 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CNYA vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CNYA
ACWI

Technology

31.7%
33.0%

Financial Services

17.6%
15.9%

Industrials

15.4%
10.3%

Basic Materials

11.2%
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

5.2%
8.6%

Healthcare

3.9%
7.7%

Utilities

3.3%
2.7%

Energy

3.1%
3.6%

Communication Services

1.3%
8.0%

Real Estate

0.6%
1.6%

Technology

CNYA
31.7%
ACWI
33.0%

Financial Services

CNYA
17.6%
ACWI
15.9%

Industrials

CNYA
15.4%
ACWI
10.3%

Basic Materials

CNYA
11.2%
ACWI
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

CNYA
6.8%
ACWI
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

CNYA
5.2%
ACWI
8.6%

Healthcare

CNYA
3.9%
ACWI
7.7%

Utilities

CNYA
3.3%
ACWI
2.7%

Energy

CNYA
3.1%
ACWI
3.6%

Communication Services

CNYA
1.3%
ACWI
8.0%

Real Estate

CNYA
0.6%
ACWI
1.6%

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. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWI
ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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.

CNYA vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.


CNYAACWIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.34

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.84

2.64

+2.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.30

11.51

+1.79

CNYA vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNYA Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNYA and ACWI, 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...

Drawdowns

CNYA vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNYA drawdown since its inception was -49.49%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYA and ACWI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CNYAACWIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.49%

-56.00%

+6.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.59%

-9.73%

+2.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.35%

-16.55%

-16.80%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.65%

-26.42%

-18.23%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.49%

-33.53%

-15.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.73%

-2.83%

-10.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.65%

-8.59%

-12.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.76%

2.23%

+0.53%

Volatility

CNYA vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a higher volatility of 7.35% compared to iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) at 5.57%. This indicates that CNYA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CNYAACWIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.35%

5.57%

+1.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.56%

11.38%

+2.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.32%

13.64%

+4.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.91%

16.20%

+7.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.52%

17.08%

+6.44%

CNYA vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNYA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.


Dividends

CNYA vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.73%, more than ACWI's 1.45% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
1.45%1.55%1.70%1.88%1.79%1.71%1.43%2.33%2.18%1.94%2.19%2.56%
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF
1.73%1.92%2.51%4.23%2.69%1.11%1.06%1.21%3.92%0.97%1.38%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CNYA and ACWI have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CNYA has higher volatility (7.35%) compared to ACWI (5.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNYA dropped -49.49% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

On 10-year performance, ACWI leads with 13.09% vs 6.50% for CNYA. On fees, ACWI is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 5.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 13.09% return vs 6.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ACWI is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNYA.

CNYA has the higher dividend yield at 1.73%, compared with 1.45% for ACWI.

CNYA is categorized as China Equities, while ACWI is Global Equities. CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNYA and 0.32% for ACWI.

CNYA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.89), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNYA and ACWI

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