CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L

Last updated Jul 26, 2026

CNYB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and FRGP.L (iShares France Govt Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - CNYB.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while FRGP.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the BBG Euro Aggregate Treasury Index - France (EUR). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNYB.L returned 4.30%/yr vs 2.60%/yr for FRGP.L. Their -0.14 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. CNYB.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for FRGP.L.

Performance

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) and iShares France Govt Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (FRGP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNYB.L achieves a 5.84% return, which is significantly higher than FRGP.L's 0.40% return.

CNYB.L

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: -0.70%
• 6M: 6.11%
• YTD: 5.84%
• 1Y: 8.43%
• 3Y*: 4.30%
• 5Y*: 3.62%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -0.08%

FRGP.L

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: -1.81%
• 6M: -0.41%
• YTD: 0.40%
• 1Y: 1.25%
• 3Y*: 2.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 2.24%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	£8.22K	£62.54K	£113.89K
FRGP.L iShares France Govt Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)	£60.94K	£178.62K	£108.06K

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	5.84%	-2.20%	6.65%	-4.09%	-4.03%
FRGP.L iShares France Govt Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)	0.40%	2.22%	0.16%	7.60%	-1.64%

Correlation

The correlation between CNYB.L and FRGP.L is -0.23, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.23
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	-0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2022	-0.14

Return for Risk

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNYB.L

CNYB.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
CNYB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CNYB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
CNYB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 61
CNYB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
CNYB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 64

FRGP.L

FRGP.L Risk / Return Rank: 17
FRGP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
FRGP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
FRGP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 16
FRGP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FRGP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) and iShares France Govt Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (FRGP.L). 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.

	CNYB.L	FRGP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	0.27	+1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	0.43	+1.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.05	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.25	0.37	+2.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.71	0.92	+6.79

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNYB.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is higher than the FRGP.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNYB.L and FRGP.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNYB.L drawdown since its inception was -25.82%, which is greater than FRGP.L's maximum drawdown of -6.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYB.L and FRGP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNYB.L	FRGP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.82%	-6.67%	-19.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.75%	-3.35%	+0.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.03%	-4.24%	-4.79%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.44%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.58%	-2.37%	-4.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.51%	-2.09%	-10.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.16%	1.35%	-0.19%

Volatility

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) has a higher volatility of 1.61% compared to iShares France Govt Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (FRGP.L) at 1.16%. This indicates that CNYB.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FRGP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNYB.L	FRGP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.61%	1.16%	+0.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.72%	3.73%	+0.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.33%	4.56%	+1.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.65%	6.24%	+1.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.46%	6.24%	+5.22%

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNYB.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FRGP.L's 0.22% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNYB.L vs. FRGP.L - Dividend Comparison

CNYB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, less than FRGP.L's 2.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	1.71%	1.89%	2.24%	2.55%	2.72%	2.74%	2.65%	0.72%
FRGP.L iShares France Govt Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)	2.92%	2.83%	2.36%	1.82%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNYB.L and FRGP.L in my portfolio?

CNYB.L and FRGP.L have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNYB.L or FRGP.L?

On fees, FRGP.L is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNYB.L or FRGP.L?

FRGP.L is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNYB.L.

What is the main difference between CNYB.L and FRGP.L?

CNYB.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while FRGP.L is Government Bonds. CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while FRGP.L tracks BBG Euro Aggregate Treasury Index - France (EUR). Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNYB.L and 0.22% for FRGP.L.