PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HMCH.L (HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF) and XCX6.L (Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China NR USD, from HSBC and DWS respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HMCH.L returned 5.59%/yr vs 5.39%/yr for XCX6.L. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. HMCH.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for XCX6.L.

Performance

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) and Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C (XCX6.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with HMCH.L having a -7.28% return and XCX6.L slightly lower at -7.52%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with HMCH.L having a 5.59% annualized return and XCX6.L not far behind at 5.39%.

HMCH.L

1D
-0.65%
1M
-1.85%
YTD
-7.28%
6M
-8.93%
1Y
5.82%
3Y*
7.83%
5Y*
-4.14%
10Y*
5.59%

XCX6.L

1D
-0.40%
1M
-1.77%
YTD
-7.52%
6M
-9.53%
1Y
5.17%
3Y*
7.33%
5Y*
-4.51%
10Y*
5.39%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HMCH.L
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF		-7.28%22.87%20.73%-16.33%-13.40%-21.06%24.96%17.80%-14.28%40.24%
XCX6.L
Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C		-7.52%22.42%20.57%-17.10%-13.36%-21.25%25.03%17.56%-14.28%40.17%

Correlation

The correlation between HMCH.L and XCX6.L is 0.99 - 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

0.99

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

0.99

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

1.00

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

1.00

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2011

0.95

The correlation between HMCH.L and XCX6.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
HMCH.L
XCX6.L

Consumer Cyclical

26.1%
26.5%

Financial Services

19.2%
19.1%

Communication Services

18.4%
18.8%

Technology

10.7%
9.6%

Industrials

5.4%
5.0%

Basic Materials

5.3%
5.5%

Healthcare

5.1%
5.4%

Energy

3.5%
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
3.2%

Utilities

1.7%
1.7%

Real Estate

1.7%
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

HMCH.L
26.1%
XCX6.L
26.5%

Financial Services

HMCH.L
19.2%
XCX6.L
19.1%

Communication Services

HMCH.L
18.4%
XCX6.L
18.8%

Technology

HMCH.L
10.7%
XCX6.L
9.6%

Industrials

HMCH.L
5.4%
XCX6.L
5.0%

Basic Materials

HMCH.L
5.3%
XCX6.L
5.5%

Healthcare

HMCH.L
5.1%
XCX6.L
5.4%

Energy

HMCH.L
3.5%
XCX6.L
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

HMCH.L
3.0%
XCX6.L
3.2%

Utilities

HMCH.L
1.7%
XCX6.L
1.7%

Real Estate

HMCH.L
1.7%
XCX6.L
1.5%

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 MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C

Often compared with HMCH.L:
HMCH.L vs. HMCD.LHMCH.L vs. XCHA.DEHMCH.L vs. HMCT.LHMCH.L vs. VOOHMCH.L vs. ^GSPCHMCH.L vs. BYDDYHMCH.L vs. VUSA.AS
Often compared with XCX6.L:
XCX6.L vs. FXC.LXCX6.L vs. IUIT.LXCX6.L vs. RQFI.LXCX6.L vs. XUIN.LXCX6.L vs. C300.LXCX6.L vs. XEUM.LXCX6.L vs. XBCU.L

Return for Risk

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L — 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: 1313
Overall Rank
HMCH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMCH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMCH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
HMCH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMCH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
XCX6.L
XCX6.L Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
XCX6.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCX6.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCX6.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
XCX6.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCX6.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) and Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C (XCX6.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.

HMCH.LXCX6.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.32
0.28

+0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.57
0.52

+0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.06

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.34

0.29

+0.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.71

0.62

+0.09

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. XCX6.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMCH.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is comparable to the XCX6.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMCH.L and XCX6.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

HMCH.LXCX6.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.32

0.28

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.15

-0.16

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.22

0.21

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.16

0.15

+0.02

Drawdowns

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCH.L drawdown since its inception was -56.50%, roughly equal to the maximum XCX6.L drawdown of -57.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCH.L and XCX6.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HMCH.LXCX6.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.50%

-57.08%

+0.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.18%

-17.48%

+0.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.67%

-24.89%

+0.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-49.31%

-49.99%

+0.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-56.50%

-57.08%

+0.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-32.69%

-34.10%

+1.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.25%

-20.91%

+0.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.17%

8.35%

-0.18%

Volatility

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) and Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C (XCX6.L) have volatilities of 7.06% and 7.09%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HMCH.LXCX6.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.06%

7.09%

-0.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.14%

13.08%

+0.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.44%

18.39%

+0.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.67%

27.71%

-0.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.21%

25.27%

-0.06%

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HMCH.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than XCX6.L's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

HMCH.L vs. XCX6.L - Dividend Comparison

HMCH.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, while XCX6.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HMCH.L
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF		2.15%2.34%2.17%2.12%1.85%1.28%0.92%1.65%1.36%0.78%1.89%2.84%
XCX6.L
Xtrackers MSCI China 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

With a correlation of 0.99, HMCH.L and XCX6.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, HMCH.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMCH.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XCX6.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCH.L and 0.65% for XCX6.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMCH.L and XCX6.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