PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ECNS vs. CNYA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ECNS vs. CNYA

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

ECNS (iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both China Equities funds from iShares - ECNS tracks the MSCI China Small Cap Index while CNYA tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ECNS returned 0.89%/yr vs 5.24%/yr for CNYA. Their 0.68 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ECNS charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.

Performance

ECNS vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECNS achieves a -10.84% return, which is significantly lower than CNYA's 1.42% return. Over the past 10 years, ECNS has underperformed CNYA with an annualized return of 0.89%, while CNYA has yielded a comparatively higher 5.24% annualized return.

ECNS

1D
-0.28%
1M
1.48%
6M
-15.13%
YTD
-10.84%
1Y
-10.63%
3Y*
3.54%
5Y*
-7.01%
10Y*
0.89%
ALL TIME*
0.21%

CNYA

1D
-0.48%
1M
-4.50%
6M
1.02%
YTD
1.42%
1Y
20.44%
3Y*
7.23%
5Y*
-1.55%
10Y*
5.24%
ALL TIME*
5.58%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

CNYA

iShares MSCI China A ETF
$1.46M$2.43M$4.11M

ECNS

iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF
$217.02K$210.44K$354.53K

ECNS vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF		-10.84%36.49%5.64%-23.05%-24.58%2.11%25.42%7.84%-18.27%27.55%
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.42%26.48%10.78%-13.76%-26.51%3.53%41.54%35.95%-26.56%30.99%

Correlation

The correlation between ECNS and CNYA is 0.64, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.64

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.70

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.71

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.69

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016

0.68

The correlation between ECNS and CNYA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

ECNS vs. CNYA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ECNS
CNYA

Healthcare

21.2%
3.8%

Industrials

20.1%
14.2%

Technology

10.7%
37.3%

Basic Materials

9.2%
10.7%

Communication Services

8.7%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
4.3%

Real Estate

8.0%
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
5.8%

Financial Services

4.4%
16.8%

Utilities

2.3%
2.9%

Energy

1.8%
2.6%

Healthcare

ECNS
21.2%
CNYA
3.8%

Industrials

ECNS
20.1%
CNYA
14.2%

Technology

ECNS
10.7%
CNYA
37.3%

Basic Materials

ECNS
9.2%
CNYA
10.7%

Communication Services

ECNS
8.7%
CNYA
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

ECNS
8.4%
CNYA
4.3%

Real Estate

ECNS
8.0%
CNYA
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

ECNS
5.3%
CNYA
5.8%

Financial Services

ECNS
4.4%
CNYA
16.8%

Utilities

ECNS
2.3%
CNYA
2.9%

Energy

ECNS
1.8%
CNYA
2.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF

iShares MSCI China A ETF

Often compared with ECNS:
ECNS vs. ASHSECNS vs. MCHIECNS vs. CNXTECNS vs. DFAEECNS vs. CQQQECNS vs. FLCHECNS vs. EWT
Often compared with CNYA:
CNYA vs. MCHICNYA vs. ASHRCNYA vs. ICHN.ASCNYA vs. KBACNYA vs. FLCHCNYA vs. ICGA.DECNYA vs. GXC

Return for Risk

ECNS vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
ECNS
ECNS Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
ECNS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECNS Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECNS Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
ECNS Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECNS Martin Ratio Rank: 66
Martin Ratio Rank
CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ECNS vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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.

ECNSCNYADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.51
1.02

-1.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
-0.57
1.49

-2.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.93

1.19

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.41

1.98

-2.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.82

5.71

-6.53

ECNS vs. CNYA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECNS Sharpe Ratio is -0.51, which is lower than the CNYA Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECNS and CNYA, 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

ECNS vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECNS drawdown since its inception was -63.43%, which is greater than CNYA's maximum drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECNS and CNYA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ECNSCNYADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-63.43%

-49.49%

-13.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-25.73%

-10.37%

-15.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.29%

-33.35%

+4.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-57.31%

-44.65%

-12.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.43%

-49.49%

-13.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-42.60%

-19.65%

-22.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.51%

-20.61%

-8.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.01%

3.58%

+9.43%

Volatility

ECNS vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) is 6.37%, while iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a volatility of 8.01%. This indicates that ECNS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ECNSCNYADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.37%

8.01%

-1.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.27%

15.84%

-1.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.87%

20.22%

+0.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.09%

23.88%

+5.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.82%

23.63%

+2.19%

ECNS vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECNS has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECNS vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison

ECNS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.60%, more than CNYA's 1.85% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.85%1.92%2.51%4.23%2.69%1.11%1.06%1.21%3.92%0.97%1.38%0.00%
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF		6.60%6.20%5.98%4.89%3.54%4.87%3.59%3.23%6.16%3.18%4.29%3.58%

Frequently Asked Questions

ECNS and CNYA have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CNYA has higher volatility (8.01%) compared to ECNS (6.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECNS dropped -63.43% vs CNYA's -49.49%.

On 10-year performance, CNYA leads with 5.24% vs 0.89% for ECNS. On fees, ECNS is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ECNS has been the lower-risk option at 6.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CNYA has performed better with a 5.24% return vs 0.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ECNS is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNYA.

ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.60%, compared with 1.85% for CNYA.

ECNS tracks MSCI China Small Cap Index, while CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for ECNS and 0.60% for CNYA.

CNYA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.02 vs -0.51), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ECNS and CNYA

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