PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GXC vs. ASHS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GXC vs. ASHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GXC achieves a -3.93% return, which is significantly lower than ASHS's 15.10% return. Over the past 10 years, GXC has outperformed ASHS with an annualized return of 5.25%, while ASHS has yielded a comparatively lower 3.27% annualized return.


GXC

1D
-2.27%
1M
-2.82%
YTD
-3.93%
6M
-5.13%
1Y
12.26%
3Y*
10.65%
5Y*
-4.55%
10Y*
5.25%

ASHS

1D
-0.17%
1M
-0.19%
YTD
15.10%
6M
23.90%
1Y
57.65%
3Y*
13.41%
5Y*
3.97%
10Y*
3.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GXC vs. ASHS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GXC
SPDR S&P China ETF
-3.93%30.84%14.60%-9.93%-22.12%-19.70%28.31%23.07%-19.39%51.66%
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
15.10%39.48%2.68%-10.03%-24.78%17.66%28.22%24.53%-35.91%7.90%

Correlation

The correlation between GXC and ASHS is 0.71, 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

0.71

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.73

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.70

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2014

0.65

The correlation between GXC and ASHS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

GXC vs. ASHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GXC
ASHS

Consumer Cyclical

22.9%
5.8%

Financial Services

17.1%
6.3%

Communication Services

14.3%
3.2%

Technology

11.9%
29.8%

Industrials

9.1%
19.7%

Basic Materials

7.0%
19.4%

Healthcare

6.7%
7.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.7%
2.6%

Energy

3.5%
3.2%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.7%

Utilities

1.8%
2.2%

Consumer Cyclical

GXC
22.9%
ASHS
5.8%

Financial Services

GXC
17.1%
ASHS
6.3%

Communication Services

GXC
14.3%
ASHS
3.2%

Technology

GXC
11.9%
ASHS
29.8%

Industrials

GXC
9.1%
ASHS
19.7%

Basic Materials

GXC
7.0%
ASHS
19.4%

Healthcare

GXC
6.7%
ASHS
7.2%

Consumer Defensive

GXC
3.7%
ASHS
2.6%

Energy

GXC
3.5%
ASHS
3.2%

Real Estate

GXC
1.9%
ASHS
0.7%

Utilities

GXC
1.8%
ASHS
2.2%

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

GXC vs. ASHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GXC
GXC Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
GXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
GXC Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
GXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
GXC Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

ASHS
ASHS Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
ASHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASHS Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
ASHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASHS Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GXC vs. ASHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). 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.


GXCASHSDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.65

2.57

-1.91

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.03

3.27

-2.24

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.42

-0.30

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.90

4.13

-3.23

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

2.02

13.72

-11.71

GXC vs. ASHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GXC Sharpe Ratio is 0.65, which is lower than the ASHS Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GXC and ASHS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GXCASHSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.65

2.57

-1.91

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.16

0.15

-0.31

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.20

0.13

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.16

0.19

-0.03

Drawdowns

GXC vs. ASHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GXC drawdown since its inception was -71.96%, roughly equal to the maximum ASHS drawdown of -69.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GXC and ASHS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GXCASHSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.96%

-69.90%

-2.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.73%

-14.03%

+0.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.54%

-34.13%

+8.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-53.99%

-47.81%

-6.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-60.23%

-47.81%

-12.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-32.10%

-33.57%

+1.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.82%

-48.57%

+19.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.09%

4.21%

+1.88%

Volatility

GXC vs. ASHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) is 6.64%, while Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) has a volatility of 7.33%. This indicates that GXC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GXCASHSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.64%

7.33%

-0.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.59%

17.00%

-3.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.88%

22.59%

-3.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.97%

26.46%

+2.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.09%

25.57%

+0.52%

GXC vs. ASHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GXC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than ASHS's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

GXC vs. ASHS - Dividend Comparison

GXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, while ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
0.00%0.00%0.69%0.65%1.90%0.76%0.43%0.57%0.00%0.00%0.00%8.34%
GXC
SPDR S&P China ETF
2.50%2.40%2.81%3.70%2.67%1.35%1.04%1.60%2.03%1.84%2.05%2.85%

Frequently Asked Questions


GXC and ASHS have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ASHS has higher volatility (7.33%) compared to GXC (6.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GXC dropped -71.96% vs ASHS's -69.90%.

On 10-year performance, GXC leads with 5.25% vs 3.27% for ASHS. On fees, GXC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, GXC has been the lower-risk option at 6.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GXC has performed better with a 5.25% return vs 3.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GXC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHS.

GXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.50%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.

GXC tracks S&P China BMI Index, while ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for GXC and 0.65% for ASHS.

ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 0.65), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GXC and ASHS

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