H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE
H4ZP.DE (HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD) and DBX9.DE (Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds - H4ZP.DE tracks the MSCI China while DBX9.DE tracks the FTSE China 50. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, H4ZP.DE returned 4.72%/yr vs 3.94%/yr for DBX9.DE. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. H4ZP.DE charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for DBX9.DE.
Performance
H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, H4ZP.DE achieves a -6.53% return, which is significantly lower than DBX9.DE's 9.85% return. Over the past 10 years, H4ZP.DE has outperformed DBX9.DE with an annualized return of 4.72%, while DBX9.DE has yielded a comparatively lower 3.94% annualized return.
H4ZP.DE
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- -3.31%
- YTD
- -6.53%
- 6M
- -9.00%
- 1Y
- 2.93%
- 3Y*
- 8.20%
- 5Y*
- -4.00%
- 10Y*
- 4.72%
DBX9.DE
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 9.85%
- 6M
- 11.95%
- 1Y
- 33.01%
- 3Y*
- 13.37%
- 5Y*
- 0.17%
- 10Y*
- 3.94%
H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H4ZP.DE HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD | -6.53% | 16.54% | 28.55% | -14.47% | -15.34% | -16.86% | 15.20% | 26.76% | -16.09% | 35.18% |
DBX9.DE Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C | 9.85% | 10.01% | 37.68% | -16.44% | -13.62% | -14.98% | -0.87% | 18.35% | -9.23% | 18.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between H4ZP.DE and DBX9.DE is 0.65, 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 | 0.65 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2013 | 0.91 |
Over the past year, the correlation between H4ZP.DE and DBX9.DE has dropped to 0.65 - well below their long-term average of 0.91, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE — Risk / Return Rank
H4ZP.DE
DBX9.DE
H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD (H4ZP.DE) and Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.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.
| H4ZP.DE | DBX9.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 1.34 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.19 | 1.90 | -1.71 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.39 | 3.67 | -3.28 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| H4ZP.DE | DBX9.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.17 | 1.24 | -1.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.14 | 0.01 | -0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 | 0.15 | +0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.19 | 0.08 | +0.11 |
Drawdowns
H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum H4ZP.DE drawdown since its inception was -55.74%, smaller than the maximum DBX9.DE drawdown of -66.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for H4ZP.DE and DBX9.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| H4ZP.DE | DBX9.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.74% | -66.51% | +10.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.83% | -17.20% | +0.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.56% | -27.83% | +3.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -49.16% | -47.59% | -1.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -55.74% | -53.98% | -1.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -31.17% | -14.62% | -16.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.08% | -29.50% | +6.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.15% | 8.91% | -0.76% |
Volatility
H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Volatility Comparison
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD (H4ZP.DE) has a higher volatility of 7.30% compared to Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE) at 5.29%. This indicates that H4ZP.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBX9.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| H4ZP.DE | DBX9.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.30% | 5.29% | +2.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.14% | 10.45% | +2.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.46% | 26.35% | -7.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.70% | 28.75% | -1.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.25% | 25.42% | -0.17% |
H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
H4ZP.DE has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than DBX9.DE's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
H4ZP.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Dividend Comparison
H4ZP.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.14%, while DBX9.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBX9.DE Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
H4ZP.DE HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD | 2.14% | 2.39% | 3.10% | 2.10% | 1.97% | 1.28% | 0.96% | 1.57% | 1.40% | 0.78% | 1.97% | 2.89% |
Frequently Asked Questions
H4ZP.DE and DBX9.DE have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, H4ZP.DE is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
H4ZP.DE is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for DBX9.DE.
H4ZP.DE tracks MSCI China, while DBX9.DE tracks FTSE China 50. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for H4ZP.DE and 0.60% for DBX9.DE.
Find the right allocation for H4ZP.DE and DBX9.DE
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