ECNS vs. ISVBF
ECNS (iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds from iShares - ECNS tracks the MSCI China Small Cap Index while ISVBF tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ECNS returned -8.73%/yr vs -6.00%/yr for ISVBF. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ECNS charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
ECNS vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ECNS achieves a -13.41% return, which is significantly lower than ISVBF's -11.89% return.
ECNS
- 1D
- -2.61%
- 1M
- -7.53%
- 6M
- -18.85%
- YTD
- -13.41%
- 1Y
- -8.94%
- 3Y*
- 3.56%
- 5Y*
- -8.73%
- 10Y*
- 0.73%
ISVBF
- 1D
- -1.30%
- 1M
- -3.57%
- 6M
- -17.04%
- YTD
- -11.89%
- 1Y
- -2.60%
- 3Y*
- 7.37%
- 5Y*
- -6.00%
- 10Y*
- —
ECNS vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | -13.41% | 36.49% | 5.64% | -23.05% | -24.58% | -9.43% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -11.89% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between ECNS and ISVBF is 0.51, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021 | 0.30 |
Over the past year, ECNS and ISVBF have become more correlated (0.51) than their long-term average of 0.30, 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
ECNS vs. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank
ECNS
ISVBF
ECNS vs. ISVBF - 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 UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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.
| ECNS | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.01 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.35 | -0.11 | -0.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.77 | -0.25 | -0.52 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ECNS vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ECNS drawdown since its inception was -63.43%, which is greater than ISVBF's maximum drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECNS and ISVBF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ECNS | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.43% | -53.78% | -9.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.73% | -24.14% | -1.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.72% | -24.14% | -7.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -58.38% | -52.51% | -5.87% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -63.43% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -44.26% | -28.59% | -15.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.46% | -32.65% | +3.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.64% | 10.37% | +1.27% |
Volatility
ECNS vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) is 6.17%, while iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a volatility of 7.77%. This indicates that ECNS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ECNS | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.17% | 7.77% | -1.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.93% | 27.10% | -13.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.99% | 31.44% | -10.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.47% | 30.44% | -0.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.80% | 30.13% | -4.33% |
ECNS vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
ECNS has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
ECNS vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison
ECNS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.79%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | 6.79% | 6.20% | 5.98% | 4.89% | 3.54% | 4.87% | 3.59% | 3.23% | 6.16% | 3.18% | 4.29% | 3.58% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ECNS and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ISVBF has higher volatility (7.77%) compared to ECNS (6.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECNS dropped -63.43% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.
On 5-year performance, ISVBF leads with -6.00% vs -8.73% for ECNS. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ECNS has been the lower-risk option at 6.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ISVBF has performed better with a -6.00% return vs -8.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for ECNS.
ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.79%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
ECNS tracks MSCI China Small Cap Index, while ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for ECNS and 0.40% for ISVBF.
ISVBF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.08 vs -0.43), 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.
Find the right allocation for ECNS and ISVBF
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