HMCD.L vs. FRCH.L
HMCD.L (HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF) and FRCH.L (Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China NR USD, from HSBC and Franklin Templeton respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMCD.L returned -5.15%/yr vs -4.78%/yr for FRCH.L. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. HMCD.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FRCH.L.
Performance
HMCD.L vs. FRCH.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
HMCD.L is traded in USD, while FRCH.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FRCH.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 FRCH.L's -6.07% 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%
FRCH.L
- 1D
- -2.23%
- 1M
- -2.60%
- YTD
- -6.07%
- 6M
- -7.03%
- 1Y
- 8.82%
- 3Y*
- 10.64%
- 5Y*
- -4.78%
- 10Y*
- —
HMCD.L vs. FRCH.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% | 17.01% |
FRCH.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF | -6.07% | 32.52% | 19.10% | -13.11% | -23.05% | -20.07% | 30.68% | -6.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between HMCD.L and FRCH.L is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2019 | 0.96 |
The correlation between HMCD.L and FRCH.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.
HMCD.L vs. FRCH.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Technology
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Industrials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Financial Services
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Communication Services
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Technology
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Basic Materials
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Healthcare
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Industrials
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Energy
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Consumer Defensive
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Utilities
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
Real Estate
HMCD.L
FRCH.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. FRCH.L — Risk / Return Rank
HMCD.L
FRCH.L
HMCD.L vs. FRCH.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.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 | FRCH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.09 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.40 | 0.55 | -0.15 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.84 | 1.16 | -0.32 |
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 | FRCH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.34 | 0.47 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.18 | -0.14 | -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 | -0.02 | +0.13 |
Drawdowns
HMCD.L vs. FRCH.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HMCD.L drawdown since its inception was -62.46%, roughly equal to the maximum FRCH.L drawdown of -61.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCD.L and FRCH.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HMCD.L | FRCH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -62.46% | -61.85% | -0.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.07% | -15.94% | -1.13% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.60% | -35.20% | +9.60% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.17% | -55.60% | -0.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -62.46% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.97% | -33.51% | -1.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.30% | -32.79% | +8.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.24% | 7.57% | +0.67% |
Volatility
HMCD.L vs. FRCH.L - Volatility Comparison
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) has a higher volatility of 8.20% compared to Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) at 7.29%. This indicates that HMCD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FRCH.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HMCD.L | FRCH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.20% | 7.29% | +0.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.70% | 13.36% | +1.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.13% | 18.60% | +1.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.19% | 33.88% | -4.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.18% | 32.24% | -6.06% |
HMCD.L vs. FRCH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
HMCD.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than FRCH.L's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
HMCD.L vs. FRCH.L - Dividend Comparison
HMCD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, while FRCH.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FRCH.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF | 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 0.96, HMCD.L and FRCH.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, FRCH.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FRCH.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for HMCD.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCD.L and 0.19% for FRCH.L.
Find the right allocation for HMCD.L and FRCH.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