CNYA vs. IEAC.AS

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) and IEAC.AS (iShares Core € Corp Bond UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNYA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while IEAC.AS is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Euro Corporate Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNYA returned -1.67%/yr vs -0.86%/yr for IEAC.AS. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNYA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for IEAC.AS.

Performance

CNYA vs. IEAC.AS - Performance Comparison

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

Different Trading Currencies

CNYA is traded in USD, while IEAC.AS is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the IEAC.AS values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNYA achieves a 4.11% return, which is significantly higher than IEAC.AS's -0.58% return.

CNYA

• 1D: -0.99%
• 1M: -4.23%
• YTD: 4.11%
• 6M: 6.49%
• 1Y: 30.18%
• 3Y*: 9.91%
• 5Y*: -1.67%
• 10Y*: —

IEAC.AS

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: -1.08%
• YTD: -0.58%
• 6M: 0.68%
• 1Y: 4.02%
• 3Y*: 7.44%
• 5Y*: -0.86%
• 10Y*: 1.24%

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

CNYA vs. IEAC.AS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF	4.11%	26.48%	10.78%	-13.76%	-26.51%	3.53%	41.54%	35.95%	-26.56%	30.99%
IEAC.AS iShares Core € Corp Bond UCITS ETF	-0.58%	16.90%	-2.06%	11.14%	-18.82%	-7.76%	11.63%	4.22%	-6.12%	16.65%

Correlation

The correlation between CNYA and IEAC.AS is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.26
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2016	0.22

Return for Risk

CNYA vs. IEAC.AS — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNYA

CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 64
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 56
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 69

IEAC.AS

IEAC.AS Risk / Return Rank: 20
IEAC.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
IEAC.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
IEAC.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 20
IEAC.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
IEAC.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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. IEAC.AS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and iShares Core € Corp Bond UCITS ETF (IEAC.AS). 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	IEAC.AS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	0.49	+1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	0.77	+1.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.09	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.99	0.57	+3.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.48	1.58	+9.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNYA vs. IEAC.AS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNYA Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is higher than the IEAC.AS Sharpe Ratio of 0.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNYA and IEAC.AS, 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

	CNYA	IEAC.AS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.71	0.49	+1.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.07	-0.09	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.14	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.25	0.24	+0.01

Drawdowns

CNYA vs. IEAC.AS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNYA drawdown since its inception was -49.49%, which is greater than IEAC.AS's maximum drawdown of -34.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYA and IEAC.AS.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNYA	IEAC.AS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.49%	-34.76%	-14.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.59%	-6.52%	-1.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.35%	-8.38%	-24.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.65%	-33.53%	-11.12%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.53%	-6.16%	-11.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.68%	-9.92%	-10.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.64%	2.38%	+0.26%

Volatility

CNYA vs. IEAC.AS - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a higher volatility of 6.87% compared to iShares Core € Corp Bond UCITS ETF (IEAC.AS) at 2.00%. This indicates that CNYA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IEAC.AS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNYA	IEAC.AS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.87%	2.00%	+4.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.79%	5.72%	+7.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.73%	7.61%	+10.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.85%	9.28%	+14.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.57%	8.69%	+14.88%

CNYA vs. IEAC.AS - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNYA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than IEAC.AS's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNYA vs. IEAC.AS - Dividend Comparison

CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, less than IEAC.AS's 3.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%
IEAC.AS iShares Core € Corp Bond UCITS ETF	3.33%	3.29%	3.39%	2.51%	0.84%	0.81%	0.84%	1.10%	0.98%	1.52%	1.66%	0.90%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNYA and IEAC.AS in my portfolio?

CNYA and IEAC.AS have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNYA or IEAC.AS?

On fees, IEAC.AS is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNYA or IEAC.AS?

IEAC.AS is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNYA.

What is the main difference between CNYA and IEAC.AS?

CNYA is categorized as China Equities, while IEAC.AS is Corporate Bonds. CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while IEAC.AS tracks Bloomberg Euro Corporate Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNYA and 0.20% for IEAC.AS.