CNYA vs. ISVBF
CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds from iShares tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNYA returned -0.39%/yr vs -6.63%/yr for ISVBF. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNYA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
CNYA vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNYA achieves a 10.91% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -14.80% return.
CNYA
- 1D
- 1.92%
- 1M
- 1.81%
- YTD
- 10.91%
- 6M
- 11.36%
- 1Y
- 35.33%
- 3Y*
- 13.10%
- 5Y*
- -0.39%
- 10Y*
- 6.74%
ISVBF
- 1D
- -0.85%
- 1M
- -9.22%
- YTD
- -14.80%
- 6M
- -14.96%
- 1Y
- -6.39%
- 3Y*
- 7.90%
- 5Y*
- -6.63%
- 10Y*
- —
CNYA vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 10.91% | 26.48% | 10.78% | -13.76% | -26.51% | 5.37% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -14.80% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNYA and ISVBF 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 | 0.37 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021 | 0.26 |
Over the past year, CNYA and ISVBF have become more correlated (0.47) than their long-term average of 0.26, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank
CNYA
ISVBF
CNYA vs. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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 | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.74 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 0.99 | +0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.68 | -0.28 | +4.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.82 | -0.68 | +13.50 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNYA vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNYA drawdown since its inception was -49.49%, smaller than the maximum ISVBF drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYA and ISVBF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNYA | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.49% | -53.78% | +4.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.59% | -22.63% | +15.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.35% | -23.77% | -9.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.65% | -52.51% | +7.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -49.49% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.14% | -30.95% | +18.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.64% | -32.68% | +12.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.76% | 9.39% | -6.63% |
Volatility
CNYA vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) have volatilities of 7.38% and 7.55%, 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 | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.38% | 7.55% | -0.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.62% | 26.94% | -13.32% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.33% | 30.86% | -12.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.92% | 30.32% | -6.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.52% | 30.14% | -6.62% |
CNYA vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNYA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNYA vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison
CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 1.69% | 1.92% | 2.51% | 4.23% | 2.69% | 1.11% | 1.06% | 1.21% | 3.92% | 0.97% | 1.38% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNYA and ISVBF 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.
ISVBF has higher volatility (7.55%) compared to CNYA (7.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNYA dropped -49.49% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.
On 5-year performance, CNYA leads with -0.39% vs -6.63% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, CNYA has been the lower-risk option at 7.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, CNYA has performed better with a -0.39% return vs -6.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNYA.
CNYA has the higher dividend yield at 1.69%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
Both ETFs track MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNYA and 0.40% for ISVBF.
CNYA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs -0.21), 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 ISVBF
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