PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HMAF.L (HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD) and KRWL.L (Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - HMAF.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD while KRWL.L tracks the MSCI Korea NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMAF.L returned 9.34%/yr vs 19.95%/yr for KRWL.L. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.45% expense ratio.

Performance

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (HMAF.L) and Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

HMAF.L is traded in GBP, while KRWL.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the KRWL.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HMAF.L achieves a 36.25% return, which is significantly lower than KRWL.L's 106.66% return.

HMAF.L

1D
-2.32%
1M
8.81%
YTD
36.25%
6M
39.16%
1Y
73.09%
3Y*
25.41%
5Y*
9.34%
10Y*
12.09%

KRWL.L

1D
-4.89%
1M
16.79%
YTD
106.66%
6M
125.77%
1Y
237.10%
3Y*
45.48%
5Y*
19.95%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
HMAF.L
HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD		36.25%31.76%13.79%-3.80%-12.60%-7.57%21.71%13.88%-9.68%
KRWL.L
Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc		106.66%86.86%-21.27%13.04%-19.64%-7.54%38.43%7.15%-12.12%

Correlation

The correlation between HMAF.L and KRWL.L is 0.69, 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

0.69

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

0.69

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

0.69

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2018

0.75

The correlation between HMAF.L and KRWL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
HMAF.L
KRWL.L

Technology

51.5%
42.8%

Financial Services

14.9%
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

9.3%
10.8%

Industrials

7.3%
4.1%

Communication Services

6.5%
11.7%

Basic Materials

2.4%
0.4%

Healthcare

2.2%
12.8%

Real Estate

1.6%
2.0%

Consumer Defensive

1.6%
10.1%

Energy

1.4%
1.2%

Utilities

1.3%
2.1%

Technology

HMAF.L
51.5%
KRWL.L
42.8%

Financial Services

HMAF.L
14.9%
KRWL.L
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

HMAF.L
9.3%
KRWL.L
10.8%

Industrials

HMAF.L
7.3%
KRWL.L
4.1%

Communication Services

HMAF.L
6.5%
KRWL.L
11.7%

Basic Materials

HMAF.L
2.4%
KRWL.L
0.4%

Healthcare

HMAF.L
2.2%
KRWL.L
12.8%

Real Estate

HMAF.L
1.6%
KRWL.L
2.0%

Consumer Defensive

HMAF.L
1.6%
KRWL.L
10.1%

Energy

HMAF.L
1.4%
KRWL.L
1.2%

Utilities

HMAF.L
1.3%
KRWL.L
2.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD

Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc

Often compared with HMAF.L:
HMAF.L vs. SPYHMAF.L vs. CP9G.LHMAF.L vs. HSTC.LHMAF.L vs. CP9U.LHMAF.L vs. H50E.LHMAF.L vs. FRIN.LHMAF.L vs. HMUD.L
Often compared with KRWL.L:
KRWL.L vs. FLKRKRWL.L vs. FRXT.LKRWL.L vs. AUAD.LKRWL.L vs. 005930.KSKRWL.L vs. LCAL.LKRWL.L vs. CP9U.LKRWL.L vs. HKOR.L

Return for Risk

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HMAF.L
HMAF.L Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
HMAF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMAF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMAF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
HMAF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMAF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank
KRWL.L
KRWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
KRWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KRWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
KRWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
KRWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
KRWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (HMAF.L) and Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.L). 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.

HMAF.LKRWL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.84
6.22

-2.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.74
5.50

-0.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.67

1.80

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.85

10.93

-4.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

22.75

38.59

-15.84

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMAF.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.84, which is lower than the KRWL.L Sharpe Ratio of 6.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMAF.L and KRWL.L, 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

HMAF.LKRWL.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.84

6.22

-2.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

0.78

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.61

-0.07

Drawdowns

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMAF.L drawdown since its inception was -39.58%, smaller than the maximum KRWL.L drawdown of -44.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMAF.L and KRWL.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HMAF.LKRWL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.58%

-44.10%

+4.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.62%

-21.55%

+10.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.52%

-28.42%

+8.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.30%

-40.54%

+6.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.58%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.05%

-5.36%

+2.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.55%

-19.40%

+6.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.20%

6.11%

-2.91%

Volatility

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (HMAF.L) is 8.65%, while Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.L) has a volatility of 17.51%. This indicates that HMAF.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KRWL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HMAF.LKRWL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.65%

17.51%

-8.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.96%

32.27%

-16.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.95%

37.87%

-18.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.03%

25.51%

-6.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.99%

25.79%

-6.80%

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both HMAF.L and KRWL.L have an expense ratio of 0.45%.

Dividends

HMAF.L vs. KRWL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither HMAF.L nor KRWL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HMAF.L
HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%1.59%
KRWL.L
Lyxor MSCI Korea 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

HMAF.L and KRWL.L have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.45% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMAF.L and KRWL.L have the same expense ratio: 0.45% per year.

HMAF.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while KRWL.L tracks MSCI Korea NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Amundi.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMAF.L and KRWL.L

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