PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CNYB.L vs. IGAA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CNYB.L vs. IGAA.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 Emerging Asia Local Govt Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IGAA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CNYB.L is traded in GBP, while IGAA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IGAA.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNYB.L achieves a 5.09% return, which is significantly higher than IGAA.L's -4.24% return.


CNYB.L

1D
0.24%
1M
-0.35%
6M
4.32%
YTD
5.09%
1Y
7.12%
3Y*
4.85%
5Y*
3.58%
10Y*

IGAA.L

1D
0.17%
1M
-1.92%
6M
-4.12%
YTD
-4.24%
1Y
-5.12%
3Y*
0.21%
5Y*
0.32%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
CNYB.L
iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
5.09%-2.20%6.65%-4.09%6.21%9.69%-19.80%0.53%
IGAA.L
iShares Emerging Asia Local Govt Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-4.24%-1.66%3.22%-0.31%2.91%-3.43%5.90%-3.23%

Correlation

The correlation between CNYB.L and IGAA.L is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.41

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

0.42

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

0.46

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019

0.41

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

CNYB.L vs. IGAA.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: 4848
Overall Rank
CNYB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank

IGAA.L
IGAA.L Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
IGAA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IGAA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
IGAA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
IGAA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
IGAA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 11
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.

CNYB.L vs. IGAA.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 Emerging Asia Local Govt Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IGAA.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.LIGAA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.83

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

0.89

+0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.58

-0.65

+3.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.11

-1.26

+7.37

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

The current CNYB.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is higher than the IGAA.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNYB.L and IGAA.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CNYB.L vs. IGAA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNYB.L drawdown since its inception was -25.82%, which is greater than IGAA.L's maximum drawdown of -9.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYB.L and IGAA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CNYB.LIGAA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.82%

-9.99%

-15.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.75%

-7.87%

+5.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.03%

-9.02%

-0.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.44%

-9.99%

-5.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.24%

-8.30%

+1.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.52%

-4.47%

-8.05%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.16%

4.06%

-2.90%

Volatility

CNYB.L vs. IGAA.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) is 1.24%, while iShares Emerging Asia Local Govt Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IGAA.L) has a volatility of 2.34%. This indicates that CNYB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGAA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CNYB.LIGAA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.24%

2.34%

-1.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.69%

6.02%

-1.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.29%

7.31%

-1.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.65%

7.87%

-0.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.47%

8.34%

+3.13%

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

CNYB.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than IGAA.L's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

CNYB.L vs. IGAA.L - Dividend Comparison

CNYB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%, while IGAA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CNYB.L
iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
1.72%1.89%2.24%2.55%2.72%2.74%2.65%0.72%
IGAA.L
iShares Emerging Asia Local Govt Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CNYB.L and IGAA.L have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CNYB.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CNYB.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IGAA.L.

CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while IGAA.L tracks BBG EM Asia Local Currency Govt Country Cap NET Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNYB.L and 0.50% for IGAA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNYB.L and IGAA.L

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