GRNB vs. CBON
Compare and contrast key facts about VanEck Vectors Green Bond ETF (GRNB) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON).
GRNB and CBON are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GRNB is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the S&P Green Bond Select Index. It was launched on Mar 3, 2017. CBON is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index. It was launched on Nov 10, 2014. Both GRNB and CBON are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: GRNB or CBON.
Key characteristics
| GRNB | CBON | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 3.95% | 2.84% |
| 1Y Return | 9.46% | 5.79% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -0.70% | -0.52% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 0.82% | 3.08% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.15 | 1.21 |
| Sortino Ratio | 3.31 | 1.83 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.40 | 1.23 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.75 | 0.59 |
| Martin Ratio | 11.44 | 6.59 |
| Ulcer Index | 0.84% | 0.87% |
| Daily Std Dev | 4.48% | 4.72% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.07% | -14.13% |
| Current Drawdown | -4.27% | -4.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between GRNB and CBON is 0.18, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Performance
GRNB vs. CBON - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, GRNB achieves a 3.95% return, which is significantly higher than CBON's 2.84% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
GRNB vs. CBON - Expense Ratio Comparison
GRNB has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CBON's 0.50% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
GRNB vs. CBON - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Green Bond ETF (GRNB) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON). 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.
Dividends
GRNB vs. CBON - Dividend Comparison
GRNB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.71%, more than CBON's 2.09% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GRNB VanEck Vectors Green Bond ETF | 3.71% | 3.18% | 2.61% | 1.98% | 2.24% | 1.80% | 1.22% | 1.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 2.09% | 3.01% | 2.70% | 3.05% | 2.88% | 3.88% | 3.40% | 3.33% | 3.25% | 2.78% | 0.28% |
Drawdowns
GRNB vs. CBON - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GRNB drawdown since its inception was -18.07%, which is greater than CBON's maximum drawdown of -14.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRNB and CBON. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
GRNB vs. CBON - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Green Bond ETF (GRNB) is 1.04%, while VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) has a volatility of 1.92%. This indicates that GRNB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CBON based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.