HMCD.L vs. CNSG.L
HMCD.L (HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF) and CNSG.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China NR USD, from HSBC and UBS respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMCD.L returned -5.15%/yr vs -6.06%/yr for CNSG.L. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. HMCD.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CNSG.L.
Performance
HMCD.L vs. CNSG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
HMCD.L is traded in USD, while CNSG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CNSG.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HMCD.L achieves a -7.16% return, which is significantly lower than CNSG.L's -2.93% 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%
CNSG.L
- 1D
- 2.89%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- -2.93%
- 6M
- -3.11%
- 1Y
- 6.40%
- 3Y*
- 8.23%
- 5Y*
- -6.06%
- 10Y*
- —
HMCD.L vs. CNSG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HMCD.L HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF | -7.16% | 31.58% | 18.68% | -11.51% | -22.53% | -22.09% | 29.32% | 17.33% |
CNSG.L UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis | -2.93% | 23.70% | 17.27% | -15.55% | -22.55% | -19.53% | 29.72% | 12.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between HMCD.L and CNSG.L is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2019 | 0.92 |
The correlation between HMCD.L and CNSG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. CNSG.L — Risk / Return Rank
HMCD.L
CNSG.L
HMCD.L vs. CNSG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.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 | CNSG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.09 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.40 | 0.52 | -0.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.84 | 1.17 | -0.33 |
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 | CNSG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.34 | 0.44 | -0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.18 | -0.21 | +0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.12 | 0.04 | +0.08 |
Drawdowns
HMCD.L vs. CNSG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HMCD.L drawdown since its inception was -62.46%, roughly equal to the maximum CNSG.L drawdown of -61.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCD.L and CNSG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HMCD.L | CNSG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -62.46% | -61.28% | -1.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.07% | -14.95% | -2.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.60% | -28.94% | +3.34% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.17% | -56.14% | -0.03% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -62.46% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.97% | -36.92% | +1.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.30% | -33.30% | +9.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.24% | 6.65% | +1.59% |
Volatility
HMCD.L vs. CNSG.L - Volatility Comparison
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) has a higher volatility of 8.20% compared to UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.L) at 6.46%. This indicates that HMCD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNSG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HMCD.L | CNSG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.20% | 6.46% | +1.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.70% | 12.48% | +2.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.13% | 17.72% | +2.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.19% | 28.73% | +0.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.18% | 27.40% | -1.22% |
HMCD.L vs. CNSG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
HMCD.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CNSG.L's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
HMCD.L vs. CNSG.L - Dividend Comparison
HMCD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, while CNSG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNSG.L UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
With a correlation of 0.93, HMCD.L and CNSG.L 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.
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 0.45% for CNSG.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCD.L and 0.45% for CNSG.L.
Find the right allocation for HMCD.L and CNSG.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