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

Performance

DRGG.L vs. CNYB.L - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DRGG.L achieves a 3.22% return, which is significantly lower than CNYB.L's 5.08% return.


DRGG.L

1D
-0.64%
1M
-0.78%
6M
2.97%
YTD
3.22%
1Y
6.08%
3Y*
3.64%
5Y*
2.65%
10Y*

CNYB.L

1D
0.23%
1M
-0.13%
6M
4.82%
YTD
5.08%
1Y
7.11%
3Y*
4.85%
5Y*
3.58%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
DRGG.L
L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
3.22%-1.73%4.79%-5.00%5.94%8.52%-25.93%
CNYB.L
iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
5.08%-2.20%6.65%-4.09%6.21%9.69%0.02%

Correlation

The correlation between DRGG.L and CNYB.L is 0.83, 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

0.83

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

0.90

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

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2020

0.89

The correlation between DRGG.L and CNYB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

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

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

DRGG.L
DRGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
DRGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DRGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
DRGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
DRGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
DRGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

CNYB.L
CNYB.L Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
CNYB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DRGG.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.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.


DRGG.LCNYB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.21

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.78

2.57

-0.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.39

6.13

-0.73

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

The current DRGG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.04, which is comparable to the CNYB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DRGG.L and CNYB.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

DRGG.L vs. CNYB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DRGG.L drawdown since its inception was -27.90%, which is greater than CNYB.L's maximum drawdown of -25.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DRGG.L and CNYB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DRGG.LCNYB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.90%

-25.82%

-2.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.40%

-2.75%

-0.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.04%

-9.03%

-0.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.77%

-15.44%

-0.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-14.39%

-7.25%

-7.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.79%

-12.53%

-6.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.13%

1.16%

-0.03%

Volatility

DRGG.L vs. CNYB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DRGG.L) is 1.44%, while iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) has a volatility of 1.68%. This indicates that DRGG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DRGG.LCNYB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.44%

1.68%

-0.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.47%

4.69%

-0.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.85%

6.29%

-0.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.33%

7.66%

-0.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.96%

11.48%

+1.48%

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

DRGG.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

DRGG.L vs. CNYB.L - Dividend Comparison

DRGG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, less than CNYB.L's 1.72% yield.


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%
DRGG.L
L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
0.87%2.04%2.27%2.48%2.61%1.40%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


DRGG.L and CNYB.L have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, DRGG.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

DRGG.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNYB.L.

DRGG.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while CNYB.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. DRGG.L tracks J.P. Morgan China Custom Liquid ESG Capped Index, while CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. They also come from different issuers: L&G and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for DRGG.L and 0.35% for CNYB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DRGG.L and CNYB.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