HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HMCT.L (HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF) and HMUD.L (HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HMCT.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while HMUD.L is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMCT.L returned -1.01%/yr vs 12.27%/yr for HMUD.L. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.30% expense ratio.

Performance

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) and HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF (HMUD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with HMCT.L having a 8.61% return and HMUD.L slightly higher at 8.96%.

HMCT.L

• 1D: -0.59%
• 1M: 0.85%
• YTD: 8.61%
• 6M: 12.34%
• 1Y: 35.90%
• 3Y*: 11.42%
• 5Y*: -1.01%
• 10Y*: —

HMUD.L

• 1D: 0.81%
• 1M: 4.77%
• YTD: 8.96%
• 6M: 9.72%
• 1Y: 22.07%
• 3Y*: 20.51%
• 5Y*: 12.27%
• 10Y*: 14.59%

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

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
HMCT.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF	8.61%	25.90%	11.76%	-13.92%	-25.89%	2.79%	43.98%	34.32%	-14.53%
HMUD.L HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF	8.96%	13.89%	25.06%	27.46%	-20.22%	27.36%	20.72%	30.48%	-10.96%

Correlation

The correlation between HMCT.L and HMUD.L is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.26
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2018	0.38

The correlation between HMCT.L and HMUD.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (3 years) to 0.38 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

HMCT.L

HMCT.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
HMCT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
HMCT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
HMCT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 64
HMCT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
HMCT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

HMUD.L

HMUD.L Risk / Return Rank: 61
HMUD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
HMUD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
HMUD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 60
HMUD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
HMUD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) and HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF (HMUD.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.

	HMCT.L	HMUD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.15	1.96	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.99	3.00	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.36	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.71	2.65	+2.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.97	11.72	+2.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMCT.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is comparable to the HMUD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMCT.L and HMUD.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HMCT.L	HMUD.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.15	1.96	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.05	0.76	-0.81
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.89	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	0.89	-0.61

Drawdowns

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCT.L drawdown since its inception was -49.06%, which is greater than HMUD.L's maximum drawdown of -34.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCT.L and HMUD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	HMCT.L	HMUD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.06%	-34.30%	-14.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.59%	-8.29%	+0.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.40%	-19.47%	-8.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.42%	-25.47%	-18.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.89%	0.00%	-12.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.66%	-4.05%	-17.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.56%	1.88%	+0.68%

Volatility

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) has a higher volatility of 6.31% compared to HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF (HMUD.L) at 2.81%. This indicates that HMCT.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HMUD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HMCT.L	HMUD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.31%	2.81%	+3.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.83%	8.24%	+3.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.66%	11.22%	+5.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.37%	16.11%	+6.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.73%	16.36%	+7.37%

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both HMCT.L and HMUD.L have an expense ratio of 0.30%.

Dividends

HMCT.L vs. HMUD.L - Dividend Comparison

HMCT.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%, more than HMUD.L's 0.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HMCT.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF	1.67%	1.73%	2.03%	2.16%	1.69%	1.12%	0.84%	1.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HMUD.L HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF	0.91%	0.95%	0.82%	0.97%	1.07%	0.78%	1.11%	1.22%	1.45%	1.24%	1.43%	1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HMCT.L and HMUD.L in my portfolio?

HMCT.L and HMUD.L have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HMCT.L or HMUD.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.30% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HMCT.L or HMUD.L?

HMCT.L and HMUD.L have the same expense ratio: 0.30% per year.

What is the main difference between HMCT.L and HMUD.L?

HMCT.L is categorized as China Equities, while HMUD.L is Large Cap Blend Equities. HMCT.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while HMUD.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD.