PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE) and Amundi MSCI China A II UCITS ETF Dist (C024.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DBX9.DE achieves a 9.85% return, which is significantly lower than C024.DE's 12.05% return. Over the past 10 years, DBX9.DE has underperformed C024.DE with an annualized return of 3.94%, while C024.DE has yielded a comparatively higher 7.12% annualized return.


DBX9.DE

1D
-0.73%
1M
0.37%
YTD
9.85%
6M
11.95%
1Y
33.01%
3Y*
13.37%
5Y*
0.17%
10Y*
3.94%

C024.DE

1D
-0.65%
1M
0.73%
YTD
12.05%
6M
14.60%
1Y
39.67%
3Y*
12.08%
5Y*
0.57%
10Y*
7.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DBX9.DE
Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C
9.85%10.01%37.68%-16.44%-13.62%-14.98%-0.87%18.35%-9.23%18.88%
C024.DE
Amundi MSCI China A II UCITS ETF Dist
12.05%14.97%22.87%-17.78%-16.12%3.37%21.54%40.72%-22.27%23.87%

Correlation

The correlation between DBX9.DE and C024.DE is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.92

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

0.74

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

0.70

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2013

0.69

Over the past year, DBX9.DE and C024.DE have become more correlated (0.92) than their long-term average of 0.69, 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

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBX9.DE
DBX9.DE Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
DBX9.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBX9.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBX9.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
DBX9.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBX9.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

C024.DE
C024.DE Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
C024.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
C024.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
C024.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
C024.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
C024.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE) and Amundi MSCI China A II UCITS ETF Dist (C024.DE). 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.


DBX9.DEC024.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.45

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.90

5.94

-4.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.67

18.19

-14.52

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBX9.DE Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is lower than the C024.DE Sharpe Ratio of 2.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBX9.DE and C024.DE, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


DBX9.DEC024.DEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.24

2.60

-1.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.01

0.03

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.15

0.30

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.08

0.30

-0.22

Drawdowns

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBX9.DE drawdown since its inception was -66.51%, which is greater than C024.DE's maximum drawdown of -49.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBX9.DE and C024.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DBX9.DEC024.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.51%

-49.68%

-16.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.20%

-6.78%

-10.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.83%

-25.82%

-2.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.59%

-40.46%

-7.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-53.98%

-47.10%

-6.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-14.62%

-8.55%

-6.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.50%

-24.80%

-4.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.91%

2.22%

+6.69%

Volatility

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE) is 5.29%, while Amundi MSCI China A II UCITS ETF Dist (C024.DE) has a volatility of 5.71%. This indicates that DBX9.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than C024.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DBX9.DEC024.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.29%

5.71%

-0.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.45%

11.25%

-0.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.35%

15.47%

+10.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.75%

22.92%

+5.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.42%

24.34%

+1.08%

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBX9.DE has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than C024.DE's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

DBX9.DE vs. C024.DE - Dividend Comparison

DBX9.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while C024.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
C024.DE
Amundi MSCI China A II UCITS ETF Dist
1.69%1.89%2.19%1.98%1.34%1.23%1.42%1.88%2.49%
DBX9.DE
Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, DBX9.DE and C024.DE move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, C024.DE is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

C024.DE is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for DBX9.DE.

DBX9.DE tracks FTSE China 50, while C024.DE tracks MSCI China A. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for DBX9.DE and 0.25% for C024.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DBX9.DE and C024.DE

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