H410.DE vs. AHYQ.DE
Compare and contrast key facts about HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (H410.DE) and Amundi MSCI World III UCITS ETF Dist (AHYQ.DE).
H410.DE and AHYQ.DE are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. H410.DE is a passively managed fund by HSBC that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets. It was launched on Sep 5, 2011. AHYQ.DE is a passively managed fund by Amundi that tracks the performance of the MSCI World. It was launched on Apr 21, 2023. Both H410.DE and AHYQ.DE 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: H410.DE or AHYQ.DE.
Correlation
The correlation between H410.DE and AHYQ.DE is 0.73, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
H410.DE vs. AHYQ.DE - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
H410.DE:
1.16
AHYQ.DE:
2.09
H410.DE:
1.66
AHYQ.DE:
2.81
H410.DE:
1.21
AHYQ.DE:
1.42
H410.DE:
0.93
AHYQ.DE:
2.92
H410.DE:
5.09
AHYQ.DE:
13.96
H410.DE:
3.16%
AHYQ.DE:
1.78%
H410.DE:
13.87%
AHYQ.DE:
11.90%
H410.DE:
-36.25%
AHYQ.DE:
-33.70%
H410.DE:
-2.47%
AHYQ.DE:
-0.27%
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with H410.DE having a 4.50% return and AHYQ.DE slightly higher at 4.60%. Over the past 10 years, H410.DE has underperformed AHYQ.DE with an annualized return of 4.25%, while AHYQ.DE has yielded a comparatively higher 10.32% annualized return.
H410.DE
4.50%
5.04%
10.04%
16.06%
3.23%
4.25%
AHYQ.DE
4.60%
3.95%
17.74%
23.64%
11.39%
10.32%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
H410.DE vs. AHYQ.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
H410.DE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than AHYQ.DE's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
H410.DE vs. AHYQ.DE — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
H410.DE
AHYQ.DE
H410.DE vs. AHYQ.DE - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (H410.DE) and Amundi MSCI World III UCITS ETF Dist (AHYQ.DE). 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
H410.DE vs. AHYQ.DE - Dividend Comparison
H410.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, more than AHYQ.DE's 1.58% yield.
| TTM | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H410.DE HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD | 2.25% | 2.40% | 2.58% | 3.11% | 2.00% | 1.69% | 2.03% | 2.20% | 1.62% | 1.71% | 2.28% | 1.88% |
AHYQ.DE Amundi MSCI World III UCITS ETF Dist | 1.58% | 1.65% | 1.78% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
H410.DE vs. AHYQ.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum H410.DE drawdown since its inception was -36.25%, which is greater than AHYQ.DE's maximum drawdown of -33.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for H410.DE and AHYQ.DE. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
H410.DE vs. AHYQ.DE - Volatility Comparison
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (H410.DE) and Amundi MSCI World III UCITS ETF Dist (AHYQ.DE) have volatilities of 3.96% and 4.13%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.