HMCH.L vs. ^GSPC

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) and S&P 500 Index (^GSPC).

HMCH.L is a passively managed fund by HSBC that tracks the performance of the MSCI China NR USD. It was launched on Jan 26, 2011.

Performance

HMCH.L vs. ^GSPC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) and S&P 500 Index (^GSPC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

HMCH.L vs. ^GSPC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
HMCH.L HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF	-5.90%	22.87%	20.73%	-16.33%	-13.40%	-21.06%	24.96%	17.80%	-14.28%	40.24%
^GSPC S&P 500 Index	-2.36%	8.10%	25.46%	18.02%	-9.86%	28.09%	12.84%	23.98%	-0.68%	9.09%

Different Trading Currencies

HMCH.L is traded in GBp, while ^GSPC is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ^GSPC values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HMCH.L achieves a -5.90% return, which is significantly lower than ^GSPC's -2.36% return. Over the past 10 years, HMCH.L has underperformed ^GSPC with an annualized return of 5.66%, while ^GSPC has yielded a comparatively higher 13.04% annualized return.

HMCH.L

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: -2.97%
• YTD: -5.90%
• 6M: -12.81%
• 1Y: 2.07%
• 3Y*: 4.47%
• 5Y*: -4.45%
• 10Y*: 5.66%

^GSPC

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: -3.37%
• YTD: -2.36%
• 6M: -0.37%
• 1Y: 13.80%
• 3Y*: 14.19%
• 5Y*: 11.28%
• 10Y*: 13.04%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

HMCH.L vs. ^GSPC — Risk / Return Rank

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

HMCH.L

HMCH.L Risk / Return Rank: 14
HMCH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
HMCH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
HMCH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 13
HMCH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
HMCH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 15

^GSPC

^GSPC Risk / Return Rank: 67
^GSPC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
^GSPC Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
^GSPC Omega Ratio Rank: 69
^GSPC Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
^GSPC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

HMCH.L vs. ^GSPC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) and S&P 500 Index (^GSPC). 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.

	HMCH.L	^GSPC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.10	0.74	-0.64
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.27	1.15	-0.88
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.03	1.18	-0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.21	1.22	-1.01
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.53	4.79	-4.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HMCH.L vs. ^GSPC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMCH.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.10, which is lower than the ^GSPC Sharpe Ratio of 0.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMCH.L and ^GSPC, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HMCH.L	^GSPC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.10	0.74	-0.64
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.16	0.71	-0.87
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.22	0.72	-0.50
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.17	0.55	-0.37

Correlation

The correlation between HMCH.L and ^GSPC is 0.38, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Drawdowns

HMCH.L vs. ^GSPC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCH.L drawdown since its inception was -56.50%, which is greater than ^GSPC's maximum drawdown of -37.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCH.L and ^GSPC.

Drawdown Indicators

	HMCH.L	^GSPC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.50%	-56.78%	+0.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.03%	-12.14%	-3.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-49.66%	-25.43%	-24.23%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-56.50%	-33.92%	-22.58%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-31.69%	-5.78%	-25.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.13%	-10.75%	-9.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.38%	2.60%	+3.78%

Volatility

HMCH.L vs. ^GSPC - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) has a higher volatility of 6.13% compared to S&P 500 Index (^GSPC) at 4.58%. This indicates that HMCH.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ^GSPC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HMCH.L	^GSPC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.13%	4.58%	+1.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.48%	9.50%	+3.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.70%	18.75%	+1.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.66%	15.90%	+11.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.18%	18.17%	+7.01%