EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

EUNA.DE (iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF Hedged Euro (Accumulating)) and ICGB.DE (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - EUNA.DE is a Global Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index, while ICGB.DE is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EUNA.DE returned -1.55%/yr vs 3.74%/yr for ICGB.DE. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. EUNA.DE charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ICGB.DE.

Performance

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF Hedged Euro (Accumulating) (EUNA.DE) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EUNA.DE achieves a -0.81% return, which is significantly lower than ICGB.DE's 8.51% return.

EUNA.DE

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.61%
• 6M: -0.61%
• YTD: -0.81%
• 1Y: 1.24%
• 3Y*: 2.20%
• 5Y*: -1.55%
• 10Y*: —

ICGB.DE

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 1.66%
• 6M: 7.11%
• YTD: 8.51%
• 1Y: 9.27%
• 3Y*: 5.17%
• 5Y*: 3.74%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EUNA.DE iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF Hedged Euro (Accumulating)	-0.81%	2.91%	1.48%	4.41%	-13.52%	-2.42%	3.86%	0.19%
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	8.51%	-7.16%	11.36%	-2.27%	1.10%	17.31%	0.08%	-10.15%

Correlation

The correlation between EUNA.DE and ICGB.DE is -0.25, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.25
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.16
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019	-0.09

The correlation between EUNA.DE and ICGB.DE shifts across timeframes, from -0.25 (1 year) to -0.09 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

EUNA.DE

EUNA.DE Risk / Return Rank: 14
EUNA.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
EUNA.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
EUNA.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 13
EUNA.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
EUNA.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 16

ICGB.DE

ICGB.DE Risk / Return Rank: 68
ICGB.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
ICGB.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
ICGB.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 66
ICGB.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
ICGB.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF Hedged Euro (Accumulating) (EUNA.DE) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.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.

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.

	EUNA.DE	ICGB.DE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.33	1.72	-1.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.49	2.50	-2.00
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.32	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.44	3.33	-2.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.13	8.75	-7.61

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EUNA.DE Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is lower than the ICGB.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EUNA.DE and ICGB.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.

Drawdowns

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EUNA.DE drawdown since its inception was -17.81%, which is greater than ICGB.DE's maximum drawdown of -13.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EUNA.DE and ICGB.DE.

Drawdown Indicators

	EUNA.DE	ICGB.DE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.81%	-13.36%	-4.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.80%	-2.77%	-0.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.11%	-11.17%	+7.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.04%	-13.36%	-3.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.91%	-1.22%	-7.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.72%	-6.40%	-0.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.09%	1.06%	+0.03%

Volatility

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF Hedged Euro (Accumulating) (EUNA.DE) is 0.94%, while iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) has a volatility of 1.31%. This indicates that EUNA.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICGB.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EUNA.DE	ICGB.DE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.94%	1.31%	-0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.89%	3.60%	-0.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.76%	5.40%	-1.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.84%	6.63%	-1.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.44%	7.90%	-3.46%

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

EUNA.DE has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than ICGB.DE's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EUNA.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Dividend Comparison

EUNA.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ICGB.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EUNA.DE iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF Hedged Euro (Accumulating)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	1.68%	1.92%	2.22%	2.58%	2.80%	2.71%	2.63%	0.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EUNA.DE and ICGB.DE in my portfolio?

EUNA.DE and ICGB.DE have a correlation of -0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EUNA.DE or ICGB.DE?

On fees, EUNA.DE is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EUNA.DE or ICGB.DE?

EUNA.DE is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for ICGB.DE.

What is the main difference between EUNA.DE and ICGB.DE?

EUNA.DE is categorized as Global Bonds, while ICGB.DE is Emerging Markets Bonds. EUNA.DE tracks Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index, while ICGB.DE tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for EUNA.DE and 0.35% for ICGB.DE.