PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCA.L) and HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF (HWWA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HMCA.L achieves a 8.77% return, which is significantly lower than HWWA.L's 13.69% return.


HMCA.L

1D
-0.53%
1M
1.89%
YTD
8.77%
6M
11.73%
1Y
37.20%
3Y*
8.50%
5Y*
0.05%
10Y*

HWWA.L

1D
-0.33%
1M
5.53%
YTD
13.69%
6M
14.69%
1Y
34.30%
3Y*
19.39%
5Y*
12.99%
10Y*
13.22%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
HMCA.L
HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF
8.77%17.38%13.48%-18.58%-17.12%4.17%39.06%30.18%-12.02%
HWWA.L
HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF
13.69%16.74%17.83%15.71%-7.83%21.70%11.03%18.57%-10.16%

Correlation

The correlation between HMCA.L and HWWA.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.35

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

0.24

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

0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2018

0.39

The correlation between HMCA.L and HWWA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.24 (3 years) to 0.39 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
HMCA.L
HWWA.L

Technology

32.1%
34.2%

Financial Services

17.5%
14.0%

Industrials

15.4%
13.2%

Basic Materials

11.2%
5.8%

Consumer Defensive

6.6%
2.2%

Consumer Cyclical

5.2%
8.3%

Healthcare

3.8%
5.6%

Utilities

3.3%
2.5%

Energy

3.2%
4.2%

Communication Services

1.3%
8.4%

Real Estate

0.5%
1.4%

Technology

HMCA.L
32.1%
HWWA.L
34.2%

Financial Services

HMCA.L
17.5%
HWWA.L
14.0%

Industrials

HMCA.L
15.4%
HWWA.L
13.2%

Basic Materials

HMCA.L
11.2%
HWWA.L
5.8%

Consumer Defensive

HMCA.L
6.6%
HWWA.L
2.2%

Consumer Cyclical

HMCA.L
5.2%
HWWA.L
8.3%

Healthcare

HMCA.L
3.8%
HWWA.L
5.6%

Utilities

HMCA.L
3.3%
HWWA.L
2.5%

Energy

HMCA.L
3.2%
HWWA.L
4.2%

Communication Services

HMCA.L
1.3%
HWWA.L
8.4%

Real Estate

HMCA.L
0.5%
HWWA.L
1.4%

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

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

HMCA.L
HMCA.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
HMCA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMCA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMCA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
HMCA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMCA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

HWWA.L
HWWA.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
HWWA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HWWA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
HWWA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
HWWA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
HWWA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCA.L) and HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF (HWWA.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.


HMCA.LHWWA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.92

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.64

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.29

5.06

+0.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.02

21.35

-6.33

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMCA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the HWWA.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMCA.L and HWWA.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


HMCA.LHWWA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.42

3.34

-0.92

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.00

1.02

-1.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

0.83

-0.56

Drawdowns

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCA.L drawdown since its inception was -44.23%, which is greater than HWWA.L's maximum drawdown of -25.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCA.L and HWWA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HMCA.LHWWA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.23%

-25.12%

-19.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.00%

-6.74%

-0.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.19%

-16.79%

-9.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.62%

-16.79%

-24.83%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.21%

-0.35%

-9.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.96%

-3.53%

-14.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.47%

1.60%

+0.87%

Volatility

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCA.L) has a higher volatility of 5.46% compared to HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF (HWWA.L) at 3.48%. This indicates that HMCA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HWWA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HMCA.LHWWA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.46%

3.48%

+1.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.35%

7.85%

+2.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.33%

10.23%

+5.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.22%

12.69%

+8.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.88%

14.32%

+8.56%

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HMCA.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than HWWA.L's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

HMCA.L vs. HWWA.L - Dividend Comparison

HMCA.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, more than HWWA.L's 1.29% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HMCA.L
HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF
1.68%1.76%1.97%2.20%1.76%1.09%0.88%1.78%0.29%0.00%0.00%0.00%
HWWA.L
HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF
1.29%1.43%1.58%1.95%2.07%1.48%1.45%2.07%2.10%1.86%1.71%1.97%

Frequently Asked Questions


HMCA.L and HWWA.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HWWA.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HWWA.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for HMCA.L.

HMCA.L is categorized as China Equities, while HWWA.L is Global Equities. HMCA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while HWWA.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCA.L and 0.25% for HWWA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMCA.L and HWWA.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