PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
GXC vs. CNYA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

GXC vs. CNYA

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

GXC (SPDR S&P China ETF) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both China Equities funds - GXC tracks the S&P China BMI Index while CNYA tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GXC returned 4.69%/yr vs 5.37%/yr for CNYA. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. GXC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.

Performance

GXC vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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 -4.85% return, which is significantly lower than CNYA's 1.92% return. Over the past 10 years, GXC has underperformed CNYA with an annualized return of 4.69%, while CNYA has yielded a comparatively higher 5.37% annualized return.

GXC

1D
0.38%
1M
6.09%
6M
-9.74%
YTD
-4.85%
1Y
3.49%
3Y*
7.77%
5Y*
-2.07%
10Y*
4.69%
ALL TIME*
4.93%

CNYA

1D
0.03%
1M
-4.04%
6M
0.38%
YTD
1.92%
1Y
21.02%
3Y*
7.65%
5Y*
-0.99%
10Y*
5.37%
ALL TIME*
5.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

CNYA

iShares MSCI China A ETF
$1.58M$2.45M$4.18M

GXC

SPDR S&P China ETF
$4.07M$2.78M$2.53M

GXC vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GXC
SPDR S&P China ETF		-4.85%30.84%14.60%-9.93%-22.12%-19.70%28.31%23.07%-19.39%51.66%
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.92%26.48%10.78%-13.76%-26.51%3.53%41.54%35.95%-26.56%30.99%

Correlation

The correlation between GXC and CNYA is 0.72, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.72

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.77

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.78

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016

0.74

The correlation between GXC and CNYA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

GXC vs. CNYA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
GXC
CNYA

Consumer Cyclical

20.1%
4.3%

Financial Services

14.9%
16.8%

Communication Services

13.4%
1.1%

Technology

9.6%
37.3%

Industrials

6.8%
14.2%

Healthcare

6.0%
3.8%

Basic Materials

4.5%
10.7%

Energy

2.6%
2.6%

Consumer Defensive

2.5%
5.8%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.5%

Utilities

1.2%
2.9%

Consumer Cyclical

GXC
20.1%
CNYA
4.3%

Financial Services

GXC
14.9%
CNYA
16.8%

Communication Services

GXC
13.4%
CNYA
1.1%

Technology

GXC
9.6%
CNYA
37.3%

Industrials

GXC
6.8%
CNYA
14.2%

Healthcare

GXC
6.0%
CNYA
3.8%

Basic Materials

GXC
4.5%
CNYA
10.7%

Energy

GXC
2.6%
CNYA
2.6%

Consumer Defensive

GXC
2.5%
CNYA
5.8%

Real Estate

GXC
1.7%
CNYA
0.5%

Utilities

GXC
1.2%
CNYA
2.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

SPDR S&P China ETF

iShares MSCI China A ETF

Often compared with GXC:
GXC vs. MCHIGXC vs. KWEBGXC vs. ASHRGXC vs. SPYGXC vs. FXIGXC vs. CQQQGXC vs. VOO
Often compared with CNYA:
CNYA vs. MCHICNYA vs. ASHRCNYA vs. ICHN.ASCNYA vs. KBACNYA vs. FLCHCNYA vs. ICGA.DECNYA vs. CHIQ

Return for Risk

GXC vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
GXC
GXC Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
GXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
GXC Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
GXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
GXC Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GXC vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

GXCCNYADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.10
1.03

-0.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.28
1.51

-1.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.03

1.19

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.11

2.00

-1.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.24

5.87

-5.63

GXC vs. CNYA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GXC Sharpe Ratio is 0.10, which is lower than the CNYA Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GXC and CNYA, 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...

Drawdowns

GXC vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GXC drawdown since its inception was -71.96%, which is greater than CNYA's maximum drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GXC and CNYA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

GXCCNYADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.96%

-49.49%

-22.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.77%

-10.37%

-7.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.54%

-33.35%

+7.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-48.78%

-44.65%

-4.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-60.23%

-49.49%

-10.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-32.76%

-19.26%

-13.50%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.86%

-20.61%

-8.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.51%

3.53%

+4.98%

Volatility

GXC vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) is 5.39%, while iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a volatility of 8.72%. This indicates that GXC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

GXCCNYADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.39%

8.72%

-3.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.92%

15.98%

-2.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.44%

20.27%

-0.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.70%

23.87%

+4.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.05%

23.62%

+2.43%

GXC vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison

GXC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

GXC vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison

GXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.18%, more than CNYA's 1.84% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.84%1.92%2.51%4.23%2.69%1.11%1.06%1.21%3.92%0.97%1.38%0.00%
GXC
SPDR S&P China ETF		2.18%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 CNYA have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CNYA has higher volatility (8.72%) compared to GXC (5.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GXC dropped -71.96% vs CNYA's -49.49%.

On 10-year performance, CNYA leads with 5.37% vs 4.69% for GXC. On fees, GXC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, GXC has been the lower-risk option at 5.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CNYA has performed better with a 5.37% return vs 4.69%. 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 0.60% for CNYA.

GXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.18%, compared with 1.84% for CNYA.

GXC tracks S&P China BMI Index, while CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for GXC and 0.60% for CNYA.

CNYA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.03 vs 0.10), 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 CNYA

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