FXC.L vs. HMCT.L
FXC.L (iShares China Large Cap UCITS) and HMCT.L (HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds - FXC.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while HMCT.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FXC.L returned -1.37%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for HMCT.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FXC.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for HMCT.L.
Performance
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FXC.L is traded in GBp, while HMCT.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the HMCT.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FXC.L achieves a -6.72% return, which is significantly lower than HMCT.L's 9.66% return.
FXC.L
- 1D
- -2.40%
- 1M
- -1.78%
- YTD
- -6.72%
- 6M
- -8.20%
- 1Y
- 3.46%
- 3Y*
- 9.76%
- 5Y*
- -1.37%
- 10Y*
- 4.68%
HMCT.L
- 1D
- 0.15%
- 1M
- 2.55%
- YTD
- 9.66%
- 6M
- 12.62%
- 1Y
- 38.79%
- 3Y*
- 8.43%
- 5Y*
- 0.17%
- 10Y*
- —
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXC.L iShares China Large Cap UCITS | -6.72% | 20.50% | 33.78% | -17.86% | -10.68% | -18.89% | 7.61% | 10.16% | -4.64% |
HMCT.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF | 9.66% | 16.93% | 13.71% | -18.22% | -17.08% | 3.76% | 39.75% | 29.21% | -12.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between FXC.L and HMCT.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 | 0.65 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2018 | 0.69 |
The correlation between FXC.L and HMCT.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Technology
Energy
Basic Materials
Industrials
Healthcare
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Financial Services
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Consumer Cyclical
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Communication Services
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Technology
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Energy
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Basic Materials
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Industrials
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Healthcare
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Real Estate
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Consumer Defensive
FXC.L
HMCT.L
Utilities
FXC.L
HMCT.L
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
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L — Risk / Return Rank
FXC.L
HMCT.L
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China Large Cap UCITS (FXC.L) and HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.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 | HMCT.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.77 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.42 | -0.38 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.22 | 5.40 | -5.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.48 | 15.25 | -14.77 |
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
| FXC.L | HMCT.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.19 | 2.37 | -2.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.05 | 0.01 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.31 | 0.28 | +0.03 |
Drawdowns
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FXC.L drawdown since its inception was -60.51%, which is greater than HMCT.L's maximum drawdown of -44.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXC.L and HMCT.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FXC.L | HMCT.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -60.51% | -44.21% | -16.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.54% | -7.15% | -8.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.53% | -26.39% | -1.14% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -46.74% | -41.63% | -5.11% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -53.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -21.71% | -9.49% | -12.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.76% | -17.91% | -0.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.20% | 2.54% | +4.66% |
Volatility
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares China Large Cap UCITS (FXC.L) has a higher volatility of 6.71% compared to HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) at 5.74%. This indicates that FXC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HMCT.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FXC.L | HMCT.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.71% | 5.74% | +0.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.57% | 11.69% | +0.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.97% | 16.34% | +1.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.14% | 21.46% | +6.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.95% | 23.22% | +1.73% |
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FXC.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than HMCT.L's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
FXC.L vs. HMCT.L - Dividend Comparison
FXC.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%, more than HMCT.L's 1.66% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
HMCT.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF | 1.66% | 1.73% | 2.03% | 2.16% | 1.69% | 1.12% | 0.84% | 1.71% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FXC.L and HMCT.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.
On fees, HMCT.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HMCT.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FXC.L.
FXC.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while HMCT.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FXC.L and 0.30% for HMCT.L.
Find the right allocation for FXC.L and HMCT.L
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