FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (FXC.AS) and HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L).

FXC.AS and HMCD.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FXC.AS is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI China NR USD. It was launched on Oct 21, 2004. HMCD.L is a passively managed fund by HSBC that tracks the performance of the MSCI China NR USD. It was launched on Jan 26, 2011. Both FXC.AS and HMCD.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (FXC.AS) and HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FXC.AS iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF	-5.85%	14.11%	38.75%	-15.70%	-16.24%	-13.34%	1.28%	15.82%	-7.05%	19.38%
HMCD.L HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF	-5.29%	15.96%	26.52%	-14.17%	-17.73%	-16.26%	18.66%	24.34%	-15.14%	35.14%

Different Trading Currencies

FXC.AS is traded in EUR, while HMCD.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the HMCD.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FXC.AS achieves a -5.85% return, which is significantly lower than HMCD.L's -5.29% return. Over the past 10 years, FXC.AS has underperformed HMCD.L with an annualized return of 3.25%, while HMCD.L has yielded a comparatively higher 4.86% annualized return.

FXC.AS

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: -1.85%
• YTD: -5.85%
• 6M: -11.66%
• 1Y: -4.98%
• 3Y*: 6.93%
• 5Y*: -2.96%
• 10Y*: 3.25%

HMCD.L

• 1D: 1.49%
• 1M: -2.45%
• YTD: -5.29%
• 6M: -12.68%
• 1Y: -1.82%
• 3Y*: 4.73%
• 5Y*: -4.85%
• 10Y*: 4.86%

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

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FXC.AS has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than HMCD.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

FXC.AS

iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF

HMCD.L

HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF

Return for Risk

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FXC.AS

FXC.AS Risk / Return Rank: 13
FXC.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
FXC.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
FXC.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 7
FXC.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
FXC.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 20

HMCD.L

HMCD.L Risk / Return Rank: 18
HMCD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
HMCD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
HMCD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 17
HMCD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
HMCD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (FXC.AS) and HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L). 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.

	FXC.AS	HMCD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.23	-0.08	-0.15
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.17	0.04	-0.21
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	1.01	-0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.49	-0.05	+0.54
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.32	-0.11	+1.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FXC.AS Sharpe Ratio is -0.23, which is lower than the HMCD.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FXC.AS and HMCD.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FXC.AS	HMCD.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.23	-0.08	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.10	-0.17	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.13	0.19	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.23	0.16	+0.06

Correlation

The correlation between FXC.AS and HMCD.L is 0.88, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L - Dividend Comparison

FXC.AS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.23%, more than HMCD.L's 2.14% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FXC.AS iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF	2.23%	2.07%	2.48%	2.68%	2.53%	2.10%	2.93%	2.74%	3.48%	2.83%	2.62%	2.94%
HMCD.L HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF	2.14%	2.25%	2.20%	2.08%	1.95%	1.31%	0.86%	1.59%	1.46%	0.75%	2.07%	2.95%

Drawdowns

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FXC.AS drawdown since its inception was -66.56%, which is greater than HMCD.L's maximum drawdown of -55.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXC.AS and HMCD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FXC.AS	HMCD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.56%	-62.46%	-4.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.92%	-16.95%	+1.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-48.37%	-56.34%	+7.97%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-53.70%	-62.46%	+8.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.81%	-34.66%	+11.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.54%	-24.20%	-1.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.25%	6.52%	-1.27%

Volatility

FXC.AS vs. HMCD.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (FXC.AS) is 5.32%, while HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) has a volatility of 6.91%. This indicates that FXC.AS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HMCD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FXC.AS	HMCD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.32%	6.91%	-1.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.80%	14.12%	-1.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.61%	22.27%	-0.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.11%	27.88%	+0.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.10%	25.62%	-0.52%