PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) and Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

HMCD.L is traded in USD, while M9SV.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the M9SV.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 M9SV.L's -1.34% 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%

M9SV.L

1D
-0.39%
1M
-2.28%
YTD
-1.34%
6M
-0.47%
1Y
7.11%
3Y*
9.28%
5Y*
3.97%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
HMCD.L
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF
-7.16%31.58%18.68%-11.51%-22.53%-22.09%29.32%21.59%-11.66%
M9SV.L
Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF
-1.34%8.52%28.14%6.19%-16.41%6.55%26.49%9.91%-7.07%

Correlation

The correlation between HMCD.L and M9SV.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.45

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

0.47

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

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 7, 2018

0.54

The correlation between HMCD.L and M9SV.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.45 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
HMCD.L
M9SV.L

Consumer Cyclical

26.5%
11.9%

Financial Services

19.1%
24.5%

Communication Services

18.8%
4.5%

Technology

9.5%
4.9%

Basic Materials

5.5%
2.4%

Healthcare

5.3%
4.8%

Industrials

5.0%
18.4%

Energy

3.7%
7.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
6.8%

Utilities

1.7%
13.9%

Real Estate

1.5%
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

HMCD.L
26.5%
M9SV.L
11.9%

Financial Services

HMCD.L
19.1%
M9SV.L
24.5%

Communication Services

HMCD.L
18.8%
M9SV.L
4.5%

Technology

HMCD.L
9.5%
M9SV.L
4.9%

Basic Materials

HMCD.L
5.5%
M9SV.L
2.4%

Healthcare

HMCD.L
5.3%
M9SV.L
4.8%

Industrials

HMCD.L
5.0%
M9SV.L
18.4%

Energy

HMCD.L
3.7%
M9SV.L
7.4%

Consumer Defensive

HMCD.L
3.2%
M9SV.L
6.8%

Utilities

HMCD.L
1.7%
M9SV.L
13.9%

Real Estate

HMCD.L
1.5%
M9SV.L
0.5%

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. M9SV.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

HMCD.L
HMCD.L Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
HMCD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMCD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMCD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
HMCD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMCD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

M9SV.L
M9SV.L Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
M9SV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
M9SV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
M9SV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
M9SV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
M9SV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
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.

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) and Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.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.LM9SV.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.10

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.40

0.89

-0.48

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.84

2.76

-1.92

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMCD.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is lower than the M9SV.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMCD.L and M9SV.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


HMCD.LM9SV.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

0.57

-0.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.18

0.19

-0.37

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

0.32

-0.21

Drawdowns

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCD.L drawdown since its inception was -62.46%, which is greater than M9SV.L's maximum drawdown of -30.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCD.L and M9SV.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HMCD.LM9SV.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.46%

-30.47%

-31.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.07%

-7.99%

-9.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.60%

-23.59%

-2.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.17%

-30.22%

-25.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-62.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-34.97%

-8.88%

-26.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.30%

-9.94%

-14.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.24%

2.57%

+5.67%

Volatility

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) has a higher volatility of 8.20% compared to Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L) at 3.45%. This indicates that HMCD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than M9SV.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HMCD.LM9SV.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.20%

3.45%

+4.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.70%

8.20%

+6.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.13%

12.42%

+7.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.19%

20.84%

+8.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.18%

21.01%

+5.17%

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HMCD.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than M9SV.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

HMCD.L vs. M9SV.L - Dividend Comparison

HMCD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, while M9SV.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
M9SV.L
Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance 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%

Frequently Asked Questions


HMCD.L and M9SV.L have a correlation of 0.45, 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 0.45% for M9SV.L.

HMCD.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while M9SV.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and China Post Global. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCD.L and 0.45% for M9SV.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMCD.L and M9SV.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