HMCD.L vs. AH50.L
HMCD.L (HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF) and AH50.L (Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China NR USD, from HSBC and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HMCD.L returned 5.01%/yr vs 7.83%/yr for AH50.L. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. HMCD.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for AH50.L.
Performance
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HMCD.L achieves a -7.16% return, which is significantly lower than AH50.L's 12.75% return. Over the past 10 years, HMCD.L has underperformed AH50.L with an annualized return of 5.01%, while AH50.L has yielded a comparatively higher 7.83% annualized return.
HMCD.L
- 1D
- -2.92%
- 1M
- -3.29%
- YTD
- -7.16%
- 6M
- -8.08%
- 1Y
- 6.94%
- 3Y*
- 10.22%
- 5Y*
- -5.15%
- 10Y*
- 5.01%
AH50.L
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 2.07%
- YTD
- 12.75%
- 6M
- 18.39%
- 1Y
- 35.80%
- 3Y*
- 15.47%
- 5Y*
- 0.26%
- 10Y*
- 7.83%
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HMCD.L HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF | -7.16% | 31.58% | 18.68% | -11.51% | -22.53% | -22.09% | 29.32% | 21.59% | -18.94% | 54.07% |
AH50.L Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D | 12.75% | 26.76% | 17.77% | -13.04% | -21.01% | -6.02% | 28.04% | 34.30% | -21.35% | 34.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between HMCD.L and AH50.L is 0.72, 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 | 0.72 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2016 | 0.82 |
The correlation between HMCD.L and AH50.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (1 year) to 0.83 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Technology
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Industrials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Financial Services
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Communication Services
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Technology
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Basic Materials
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Healthcare
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Industrials
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Energy
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Consumer Defensive
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Utilities
HMCD.L
AH50.L
Real Estate
HMCD.L
AH50.L
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
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L — Risk / Return Rank
HMCD.L
AH50.L
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) and Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.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.
| HMCD.L | AH50.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.35 | -0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.40 | 4.29 | -3.89 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.84 | 13.16 | -12.32 |
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
| HMCD.L | AH50.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.34 | 1.98 | -1.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.18 | 0.01 | -0.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 | 0.34 | -0.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.12 | 0.33 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HMCD.L drawdown since its inception was -62.46%, which is greater than AH50.L's maximum drawdown of -50.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCD.L and AH50.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HMCD.L | AH50.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -62.46% | -50.58% | -11.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.07% | -8.30% | -8.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.60% | -25.95% | +0.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.17% | -45.27% | -10.90% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -62.46% | -50.58% | -11.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.97% | -8.51% | -26.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.30% | -21.40% | -2.90% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.24% | 2.71% | +5.53% |
Volatility
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L - Volatility Comparison
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) has a higher volatility of 8.20% compared to Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L) at 6.49%. This indicates that HMCD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AH50.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HMCD.L | AH50.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.20% | 6.49% | +1.71% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.70% | 13.10% | +1.60% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.13% | 18.10% | +2.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.19% | 24.33% | +4.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.18% | 23.39% | +2.79% |
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
HMCD.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than AH50.L's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
HMCD.L vs. AH50.L - Dividend Comparison
HMCD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, more than AH50.L's 2.07% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AH50.L Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D | 2.07% | 2.79% | 2.37% | 2.72% | 3.00% | 1.78% | 1.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
HMCD.L HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF | 2.15% | 2.25% | 2.20% | 2.08% | 1.95% | 1.31% | 0.86% | 1.59% | 1.46% | 0.75% | 2.07% | 2.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HMCD.L and AH50.L have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HMCD.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HMCD.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AH50.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCD.L and 0.65% for AH50.L.
Find the right allocation for HMCD.L and AH50.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