CNYA vs. SGOV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) and SGOV (iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNYA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while SGOV is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the ICE 0-3 Month US Treasury Securities Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNYA returned -1.06%/yr vs 3.54%/yr for SGOV. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. CNYA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for SGOV.

Performance

CNYA vs. SGOV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF (SGOV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNYA achieves a 9.30% return, which is significantly higher than SGOV's 1.51% return.

CNYA

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 2.34%
• YTD: 9.30%
• 6M: 13.79%
• 1Y: 37.95%
• 3Y*: 11.00%
• 5Y*: -1.06%
• 10Y*: —

SGOV

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.29%
• YTD: 1.51%
• 6M: 1.80%
• 1Y: 3.95%
• 3Y*: 4.72%
• 5Y*: 3.54%
• 10Y*: —

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

CNYA vs. SGOV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF	9.30%	26.48%	10.78%	-13.76%	-26.51%	3.53%	51.49%
SGOV iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF	1.51%	4.24%	5.27%	5.12%	1.58%	0.04%	0.05%

Correlation

The correlation between CNYA and SGOV is -0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.03
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2020	-0.00

The correlation between CNYA and SGOV shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.01 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CNYA vs. SGOV — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNYA

CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 71
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 64
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 76

SGOV

SGOV Risk / Return Rank: 100
SGOV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
SGOV Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
SGOV Omega Ratio Rank: 100
SGOV Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
SGOV Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. SGOV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF (SGOV). 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	SGOV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.20	20.28	-18.08
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.02	275.69	-272.66
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	195.55	-194.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.02	398.20	-393.18
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.84	4,462.00	-4,447.16
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. SGOV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNYA Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is lower than the SGOV Sharpe Ratio of 20.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNYA and SGOV, 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	SGOV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.20	20.28	-18.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.04	14.73	-14.78
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	12.48	-12.21

Drawdowns

CNYA vs. SGOV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNYA drawdown since its inception was -49.49%, which is greater than SGOV's maximum drawdown of -0.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYA and SGOV.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNYA	SGOV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.49%	-0.03%	-49.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.59%	-0.01%	-7.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.35%	-0.01%	-33.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.70%	-0.03%	-44.67%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.42%	0.00%	-13.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.69%	-0.00%	-20.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.56%	0.00%	+2.56%

Volatility

CNYA vs. SGOV - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a higher volatility of 6.42% compared to iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF (SGOV) at 0.05%. This indicates that CNYA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SGOV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNYA	SGOV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.42%	0.05%	+6.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.30%	0.13%	+12.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.32%	0.20%	+17.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.81%	0.24%	+23.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.56%	0.24%	+23.32%

CNYA vs. SGOV - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNYA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than SGOV's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNYA vs. SGOV - Dividend Comparison

CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, less than SGOV's 3.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF	1.75%	1.92%	2.51%	4.23%	2.69%	1.11%	1.06%	1.21%	3.92%	0.97%	1.38%
SGOV iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF	3.86%	4.10%	5.10%	4.87%	1.45%	0.03%	0.05%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNYA and SGOV in my portfolio?

CNYA and SGOV have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CNYA or SGOV?

CNYA has higher volatility (6.42%) compared to SGOV (0.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNYA dropped -49.49% vs SGOV's -0.03%.

Which ETF is better, CNYA or SGOV?

On 5-year performance, SGOV leads with 3.54% vs -1.06% for CNYA. On fees, SGOV is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, SGOV has been the lower-risk option at 0.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNYA or SGOV?

Over the 5-year period, SGOV has performed better with a 3.54% return vs -1.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNYA or SGOV?

SGOV is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNYA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CNYA or SGOV?

SGOV has the higher dividend yield at 3.86%, compared with 1.75% for CNYA.

What is the main difference between CNYA and SGOV?

CNYA is categorized as China Equities, while SGOV is Ultrashort Bond. CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while SGOV tracks ICE 0-3 Month US Treasury Securities Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNYA and 0.09% for SGOV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SGOV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (20.28 vs 2.20), 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.