FCA vs. ISVBF
FCA (First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds - FCA tracks the NASDAQ AlphaDEX China Index while ISVBF tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FCA returned 5.03%/yr vs -5.16%/yr for ISVBF. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FCA charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
FCA vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FCA achieves a 11.99% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -6.46% return.
FCA
- 1D
- 0.41%
- 1M
- -2.70%
- YTD
- 11.99%
- 6M
- 10.11%
- 1Y
- 44.72%
- 3Y*
- 20.23%
- 5Y*
- 5.03%
- 10Y*
- 9.93%
ISVBF
- 1D
- -2.03%
- 1M
- -2.58%
- YTD
- -6.46%
- 6M
- -7.93%
- 1Y
- 7.29%
- 3Y*
- 9.94%
- 5Y*
- -5.16%
- 10Y*
- —
FCA vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCA First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund | 11.99% | 45.20% | 14.07% | -8.28% | -17.61% | -8.24% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -6.46% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCA and ISVBF is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2021 | 0.23 |
The correlation between FCA and ISVBF shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (5 years) to 0.39 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank
FCA
ISVBF
FCA vs. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) 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.
| FCA | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.07 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.04 | 0.38 | +3.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.48 | 0.89 | +10.58 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FCA | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.02 | 0.24 | +1.78 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.18 | -0.17 | +0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.37 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.13 | -0.15 | +0.28 |
Drawdowns
FCA vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCA drawdown since its inception was -45.56%, smaller than the maximum ISVBF drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCA and ISVBF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FCA | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.56% | -53.78% | +8.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.13% | -19.18% | +8.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.13% | -23.77% | -2.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.47% | -53.22% | +10.75% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.47% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.50% | -24.18% | +15.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.62% | -32.76% | +11.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.91% | 8.21% | -4.30% |
Volatility
FCA vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) is 8.33%, while iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a volatility of 10.81%. This indicates that FCA 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
| FCA | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.33% | 10.81% | -2.48% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.57% | 26.55% | -9.98% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.29% | 30.57% | -8.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.59% | 30.20% | -2.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.63% | 30.21% | -3.58% |
FCA vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
FCA has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
FCA vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison
FCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.30%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCA First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund | 2.30% | 2.67% | 5.17% | 5.70% | 6.00% | 4.91% | 4.12% | 3.73% | 3.10% | 2.30% | 2.51% | 4.13% |
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
FCA and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ISVBF has higher volatility (10.81%) compared to FCA (8.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCA dropped -45.56% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.
On 5-year performance, FCA leads with 5.03% vs -5.16% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, FCA has been the lower-risk option at 8.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FCA has performed better with a 5.03% return vs -5.16%. 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 0.80% for FCA.
FCA has the higher dividend yield at 2.30%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
FCA tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX China Index, while ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FCA and 0.40% for ISVBF.
FCA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 0.24), 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 FCA 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