PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HMCD.L vs. XCHA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HMCD.L vs. XCHA.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HMCD.L (HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF) and XCHA.L (Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds - HMCD.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while XCHA.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HMCD.L returned 5.01%/yr vs 9.44%/yr for XCHA.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HMCD.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for XCHA.L.

Performance

HMCD.L vs. XCHA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) and Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HMCD.L achieves a -7.16% return, which is significantly lower than XCHA.L's 12.08% return. Over the past 10 years, HMCD.L has underperformed XCHA.L with an annualized return of 5.01%, while XCHA.L has yielded a comparatively higher 9.44% 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%

XCHA.L

1D
-0.02%
1M
2.76%
YTD
12.08%
6M
16.35%
1Y
43.73%
3Y*
15.17%
5Y*
2.18%
10Y*
9.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		12.08%30.08%16.02%-11.00%-24.25%3.24%45.85%40.57%-24.28%35.23%

Correlation

The correlation between HMCD.L and XCHA.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

0.76

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

0.77

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2012

0.72

The correlation between HMCD.L and XCHA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
HMCD.L
XCHA.L

Consumer Cyclical

26.5%
6.5%

Financial Services

19.1%
20.0%

Communication Services

18.8%
1.6%

Technology

9.5%
26.9%

Basic Materials

5.5%
10.3%

Healthcare

5.3%
4.7%

Industrials

5.0%
16.5%

Energy

3.7%
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
7.2%

Utilities

1.7%
2.8%

Real Estate

1.5%
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

HMCD.L
26.5%
XCHA.L
6.5%

Financial Services

HMCD.L
19.1%
XCHA.L
20.0%

Communication Services

HMCD.L
18.8%
XCHA.L
1.6%

Technology

HMCD.L
9.5%
XCHA.L
26.9%

Basic Materials

HMCD.L
5.5%
XCHA.L
10.3%

Healthcare

HMCD.L
5.3%
XCHA.L
4.7%

Industrials

HMCD.L
5.0%
XCHA.L
16.5%

Energy

HMCD.L
3.7%
XCHA.L
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

HMCD.L
3.2%
XCHA.L
7.2%

Utilities

HMCD.L
1.7%
XCHA.L
2.8%

Real Estate

HMCD.L
1.5%
XCHA.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.

HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF

Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C

Often compared with HMCD.L:
HMCD.L vs. HMCH.LHMCD.L vs. IDFX.LHMCD.L vs. FLXC.LHMCD.L vs. FXC.ASHMCD.L vs. C300.LHMCD.L vs. FXIHMCD.L vs. CEBG.L
Often compared with XCHA.L:
XCHA.L vs. ASHRXCHA.L vs. CSPX.LXCHA.L vs. VUAA.DEXCHA.L vs. HMCT.LXCHA.L vs. CA3S.LXCHA.L vs. XCNA.LXCHA.L vs. CEBG.L

Return for Risk

HMCD.L vs. XCHA.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
XCHA.L
XCHA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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. XCHA.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 CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.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.LXCHA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.34
2.62

-2.28

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.63
3.57

-2.94

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.47

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.40

6.99

-6.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.84

20.32

-19.48

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current HMCD.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is lower than the XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMCD.L and XCHA.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.LXCHA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

2.62

-2.28

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.18

0.10

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.19

0.42

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.12

0.29

-0.18

Drawdowns

HMCD.L vs. XCHA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCD.L drawdown since its inception was -62.46%, which is greater than XCHA.L's maximum drawdown of -50.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCD.L and XCHA.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HMCD.LXCHA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.46%

-50.88%

-11.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.07%

-6.23%

-10.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.60%

-26.84%

+1.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.17%

-40.18%

-15.99%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-62.46%

-44.90%

-17.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-34.97%

-1.37%

-33.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.30%

-24.59%

+0.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.24%

2.15%

+6.09%

Volatility

HMCD.L vs. XCHA.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) has a higher volatility of 8.20% compared to Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) at 6.09%. This indicates that HMCD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XCHA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HMCD.LXCHA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.20%

6.09%

+2.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.70%

11.47%

+3.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.13%

16.61%

+3.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.19%

22.39%

+6.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.18%

22.70%

+3.48%

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

HMCD.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than XCHA.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

HMCD.L vs. XCHA.L - Dividend Comparison

HMCD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, while XCHA.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%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		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 XCHA.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 0.50% for XCHA.L.

HMCD.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while XCHA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCD.L and 0.50% for XCHA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMCD.L and XCHA.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