H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

H410.DE (HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD) and LCUA.DE (Amundi MSCI Emerging Asia II UCITS ETF Acc) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - H410.DE tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets while LCUA.DE tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, H410.DE returned 8.17%/yr vs 8.90%/yr for LCUA.DE. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. H410.DE charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for LCUA.DE.

Performance

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (H410.DE) and Amundi MSCI Emerging Asia II UCITS ETF Acc (LCUA.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, H410.DE achieves a 27.49% return, which is significantly lower than LCUA.DE's 31.85% return.

H410.DE

• 1D: -1.81%
• 1M: 3.71%
• YTD: 27.49%
• 6M: 27.95%
• 1Y: 49.05%
• 3Y*: 20.39%
• 5Y*: 8.17%
• 10Y*: 9.77%

LCUA.DE

• 1D: -1.97%
• 1M: 5.12%
• YTD: 31.85%
• 6M: 32.05%
• 1Y: 53.21%
• 3Y*: 22.72%
• 5Y*: 8.90%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
H410.DE HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD	27.49%	18.61%	13.89%	4.66%	-13.80%	3.98%	7.04%	21.02%	-10.19%
LCUA.DE Amundi MSCI Emerging Asia II UCITS ETF Acc	31.85%	18.08%	18.51%	3.26%	-14.89%	1.98%	15.44%	22.39%	-10.90%

Correlation

The correlation between H410.DE and LCUA.DE is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2018	0.97

The correlation between H410.DE and LCUA.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

H410.DE

H410.DE Risk / Return Rank: 85
H410.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
H410.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
H410.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 85
H410.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
H410.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 84

LCUA.DE

LCUA.DE Risk / Return Rank: 83
LCUA.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
LCUA.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
LCUA.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 83
LCUA.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
LCUA.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (H410.DE) and Amundi MSCI Emerging Asia II UCITS ETF Acc (LCUA.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.

	H410.DE	LCUA.DE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.82	2.72	+0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.76	3.59	+0.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.49	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.75	4.49	+0.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.19	16.33	+0.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current H410.DE Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is comparable to the LCUA.DE Sharpe Ratio of 2.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of H410.DE and LCUA.DE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	H410.DE	LCUA.DE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.82	2.72	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49	0.48	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.53	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	0.48	-0.07

Drawdowns

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum H410.DE drawdown since its inception was -36.25%, which is greater than LCUA.DE's maximum drawdown of -33.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for H410.DE and LCUA.DE.

Drawdown Indicators

	H410.DE	LCUA.DE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.25%	-33.18%	-3.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.48%	-12.13%	+1.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.96%	-21.07%	+2.11%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.76%	-28.54%	+4.78%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.80%	-2.86%	+0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.25%	-12.02%	+1.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.90%	3.34%	-0.44%

Volatility

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (H410.DE) is 7.30%, while Amundi MSCI Emerging Asia II UCITS ETF Acc (LCUA.DE) has a volatility of 8.54%. This indicates that H410.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LCUA.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	H410.DE	LCUA.DE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.30%	8.54%	-1.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.96%	17.04%	-2.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.70%	20.08%	-2.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.64%	18.48%	-1.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.17%	19.46%	-1.29%

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

H410.DE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than LCUA.DE's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

H410.DE vs. LCUA.DE - Dividend Comparison

H410.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, while LCUA.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
H410.DE HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD	1.60%	2.00%	2.40%	2.58%	3.11%	2.00%	1.69%	2.03%	2.20%	1.62%	1.71%	2.28%
LCUA.DE Amundi MSCI Emerging Asia II UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both H410.DE and LCUA.DE in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, H410.DE and LCUA.DE move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, H410.DE or LCUA.DE?

On fees, LCUA.DE is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, H410.DE or LCUA.DE?

LCUA.DE is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for H410.DE.

What is the main difference between H410.DE and LCUA.DE?

H410.DE tracks MSCI Emerging Markets, while LCUA.DE tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Asia. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for H410.DE and 0.12% for LCUA.DE.