PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCA vs. ASHS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCA vs. ASHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCA achieves a 3.82% return, which is significantly lower than ASHS's 20.07% return. Over the past 10 years, FCA has outperformed ASHS with an annualized return of 9.27%, while ASHS has yielded a comparatively lower 4.06% annualized return.


FCA

1D
-2.20%
1M
-6.29%
YTD
3.82%
6M
2.03%
1Y
28.89%
3Y*
19.12%
5Y*
3.23%
10Y*
9.27%

ASHS

1D
-2.58%
1M
1.98%
YTD
20.07%
6M
23.64%
1Y
63.65%
3Y*
16.53%
5Y*
4.91%
10Y*
4.06%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FCA vs. ASHS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FCA
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund
3.82%45.20%14.07%-8.28%-17.61%-0.65%11.80%18.72%-18.30%60.26%
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
20.07%39.48%2.68%-10.03%-24.78%17.66%28.22%24.53%-35.91%7.90%

Correlation

The correlation between FCA and ASHS is 0.58, 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

0.58

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

0.60

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

0.59

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2014

0.54

The correlation between FCA and ASHS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

FCA vs. ASHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FCA
ASHS

Industrials

23.6%
18.7%

Financial Services

20.2%
5.3%

Basic Materials

18.7%
16.5%

Energy

14.4%
2.2%

Technology

12.1%
33.2%

Healthcare

2.9%
6.2%

Communication Services

2.7%
1.3%

Utilities

2.7%
2.3%

Real Estate

1.2%
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

1.0%
5.3%

Consumer Defensive

0.5%
1.7%

Industrials

FCA
23.6%
ASHS
18.7%

Financial Services

FCA
20.2%
ASHS
5.3%

Basic Materials

FCA
18.7%
ASHS
16.5%

Energy

FCA
14.4%
ASHS
2.2%

Technology

FCA
12.1%
ASHS
33.2%

Healthcare

FCA
2.9%
ASHS
6.2%

Communication Services

FCA
2.7%
ASHS
1.3%

Utilities

FCA
2.7%
ASHS
2.3%

Real Estate

FCA
1.2%
ASHS
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

FCA
1.0%
ASHS
5.3%

Consumer Defensive

FCA
0.5%
ASHS
1.7%

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

FCA vs. ASHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCA
FCA Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
FCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCA Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
FCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCA Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank

ASHS
ASHS Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
ASHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASHS Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
ASHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASHS Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

FCA vs. ASHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). 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.


FCAASHSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.48

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.70

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.45

-0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.81

4.56

-2.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.93

14.25

-8.31

FCA vs. ASHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCA Sharpe Ratio is 1.26, which is lower than the ASHS Sharpe Ratio of 2.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCA and ASHS, 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

FCA vs. ASHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCA drawdown since its inception was -45.56%, smaller than the maximum ASHS drawdown of -69.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCA and ASHS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCAASHSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.56%

-69.90%

+24.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.07%

-14.03%

-2.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.13%

-34.13%

+8.00%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.47%

-47.81%

+5.34%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.47%

-47.81%

+5.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.17%

-30.70%

+15.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.61%

-48.49%

+26.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.88%

4.48%

+0.40%

Volatility

FCA vs. ASHS - Volatility Comparison

First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) have volatilities of 7.95% and 7.72%, 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


FCAASHSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.95%

7.72%

+0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.58%

17.92%

-0.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.00%

23.32%

-0.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.72%

26.60%

+1.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.69%

25.60%

+1.09%

FCA vs. ASHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCA has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than ASHS's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCA vs. ASHS - Dividend Comparison

FCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.48%, while ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
0.00%0.00%0.69%0.65%1.90%0.76%0.43%0.57%0.00%0.00%0.00%8.34%
FCA
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund
2.48%2.67%5.17%5.70%6.00%4.91%4.12%3.73%3.10%2.30%2.51%4.13%

Frequently Asked Questions


FCA and ASHS have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCA has higher volatility (7.95%) compared to ASHS (7.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCA dropped -45.56% vs ASHS's -69.90%.

On 10-year performance, FCA leads with 9.27% vs 4.06% for ASHS. On fees, ASHS is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASHS has been the lower-risk option at 7.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FCA has performed better with a 9.27% return vs 4.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ASHS is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FCA.

FCA has the higher dividend yield at 2.48%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.

FCA tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX China Index, while ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FCA and 0.65% for ASHS.

ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 1.26), 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 FCA and ASHS

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