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 -7.01%/yr vs -2.35%/yr for ISVBF. Their 0.31 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. 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 -10.84% return, which is significantly lower than ISVBF's -6.13% 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%
ISVBF
- 1D
- 1.03%
- 1M
- 9.78%
- 6M
- -8.67%
- YTD
- -6.13%
- 1Y
- 1.35%
- 3Y*
- 8.69%
- 5Y*
- -2.35%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -4.31%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $217.02K | $210.44K | $354.53K | |
| $136.08K | $258.28K | $313.33K |
ECNS vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | -10.84% | 36.49% | 5.64% | -23.05% | -24.58% | -9.43% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -6.13% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between ECNS and ISVBF is 0.51, 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. | 0.51 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.45 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.32 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021 | 0.31 |
Over the past year, ECNS and ISVBF have become more correlated (0.51) than their long-term average of 0.31, 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 | -0.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.93 | 1.04 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.41 | 0.06 | -0.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.82 | 0.12 | -0.94 |
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 | -29.29% | -24.14% | -5.15% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -57.31% | -46.06% | -11.25% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -63.43% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -42.60% | -23.92% | -18.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.51% | -32.57% | +3.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.01% | 11.18% | +1.83% |
Volatility
ECNS vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) have volatilities of 6.37% and 6.48%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. 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 | 6.37% | 6.48% | -0.11% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.27% | 26.51% | -12.24% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.87% | 31.66% | -10.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.09% | 30.08% | -0.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.82% | 30.07% | -4.25% |
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 6.60%, 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 | 6.60% | 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 (6.48%) compared to ECNS (6.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECNS dropped -63.43% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.
On 5-year performance, ISVBF leads with -2.35% vs -7.01% for ECNS. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% 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 5-year period, ISVBF has performed better with a -2.35% return vs -7.01%. 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 6.60%, 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 (0.04 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.
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