FXC.L vs. CNUA.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FXC.L (iShares China Large Cap UCITS) and CNUA.L (UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both China Equities funds - FXC.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while CNUA.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FXC.L returned -1.40%/yr vs 3.76%/yr for CNUA.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FXC.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for CNUA.L.

Performance

FXC.L vs. CNUA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares China Large Cap UCITS (FXC.L) and UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FXC.L achieves a -6.84% return, which is significantly lower than CNUA.L's 11.84% return.

FXC.L

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -1.78%
• YTD: -6.84%
• 6M: -8.85%
• 1Y: 1.98%
• 3Y*: 9.97%
• 5Y*: -1.40%
• 10Y*: 4.44%

CNUA.L

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 2.91%
• YTD: 11.84%
• 6M: 15.17%
• 1Y: 44.25%
• 3Y*: 12.83%
• 5Y*: 3.76%
• 10Y*: —

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

FXC.L vs. CNUA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FXC.L iShares China Large Cap UCITS	-6.84%	20.50%	33.78%	-17.86%	-10.68%	-18.89%	11.28%
CNUA.L UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	11.84%	22.98%	16.55%	-16.32%	-15.85%	10.51%	38.62%

Correlation

The correlation between FXC.L and CNUA.L is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2020	0.63

The correlation between FXC.L and CNUA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

FXC.L vs. CNUA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FXC.L	CNUA.L
Financial Services	34.7%	18.8%
Consumer Cyclical	26.6%	5.6%
Communication Services	16.2%	1.4%
Technology	5.4%	27.2%
Energy	5.2%	3.4%
Basic Materials	4.1%	12.4%
Industrials	3.1%	15.7%
Healthcare	2.3%	4.3%
Real Estate	1.1%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	0.9%	7.4%
Utilities	0.4%	3.2%

Return for Risk

FXC.L vs. CNUA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FXC.L

FXC.L Risk / Return Rank: 10
FXC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
FXC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
FXC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 10
FXC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
FXC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 10

CNUA.L

CNUA.L Risk / Return Rank: 88
CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CNUA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
CNUA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 84
CNUA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CNUA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.L vs. CNUA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China Large Cap UCITS (FXC.L) and UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.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.L	CNUA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.11	2.84	-2.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.28	3.77	-3.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.03	1.50	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.13	6.63	-6.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.27	19.91	-19.63
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.L vs. CNUA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FXC.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.11, which is lower than the CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FXC.L and CNUA.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FXC.L	CNUA.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11	2.84	-2.73
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.05	0.18	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.18	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	0.41	-0.10

Drawdowns

FXC.L vs. CNUA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FXC.L drawdown since its inception was -60.51%, which is greater than CNUA.L's maximum drawdown of -38.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXC.L and CNUA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FXC.L	CNUA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.51%	-38.31%	-22.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.54%	-6.64%	-8.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.53%	-21.43%	-6.10%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.74%	-38.31%	-8.43%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-53.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.82%	-2.17%	-19.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.76%	-14.93%	-3.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.25%	2.22%	+5.03%

Volatility

FXC.L vs. CNUA.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares China Large Cap UCITS (FXC.L) has a higher volatility of 6.71% compared to UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L) at 5.67%. This indicates that FXC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNUA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FXC.L	CNUA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.71%	5.67%	+1.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.57%	10.52%	+2.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.89%	15.52%	+2.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.13%	21.25%	+6.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.95%	22.74%	+2.21%

FXC.L vs. CNUA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FXC.L vs. CNUA.L - Dividend Comparison

FXC.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%, while CNUA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNUA.L UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FXC.L iShares China Large Cap UCITS	2.58%	2.37%	2.99%	3.10%	2.85%	2.51%	3.26%	3.22%	3.89%	3.18%	3.04%	4.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FXC.L and CNUA.L in my portfolio?

FXC.L and CNUA.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FXC.L or CNUA.L?

On fees, CNUA.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FXC.L or CNUA.L?

CNUA.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FXC.L.

What is the main difference between FXC.L and CNUA.L?

FXC.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while CNUA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: iShares and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FXC.L and 0.30% for CNUA.L.