PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HMCT.L vs. IASH.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HMCT.L vs. IASH.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 iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with HMCT.L having a 8.61% return and IASH.L slightly lower at 8.43%.


HMCT.L

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

IASH.L

1D
-0.70%
1M
1.28%
YTD
8.43%
6M
12.74%
1Y
35.66%
3Y*
11.31%
5Y*
-1.15%
10Y*
6.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
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%
IASH.L
iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD
8.43%26.55%11.04%-14.55%-26.12%3.53%41.86%35.66%-14.05%

Correlation

The correlation between HMCT.L and IASH.L is 0.95 - 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

0.95

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

0.95

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

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2018

0.95

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

HMCT.L vs. IASH.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
HMCT.L
IASH.L

Technology

26.9%
31.0%

Financial Services

18.9%
17.8%

Industrials

15.7%
15.5%

Basic Materials

12.4%
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

7.5%
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
5.4%

Healthcare

4.3%
3.9%

Energy

3.4%
3.2%

Utilities

3.2%
3.2%

Communication Services

1.4%
1.3%

Real Estate

0.6%
0.6%

Technology

HMCT.L
26.9%
IASH.L
31.0%

Financial Services

HMCT.L
18.9%
IASH.L
17.8%

Industrials

HMCT.L
15.7%
IASH.L
15.5%

Basic Materials

HMCT.L
12.4%
IASH.L
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

HMCT.L
7.5%
IASH.L
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

HMCT.L
5.7%
IASH.L
5.4%

Healthcare

HMCT.L
4.3%
IASH.L
3.9%

Energy

HMCT.L
3.4%
IASH.L
3.2%

Utilities

HMCT.L
3.2%
IASH.L
3.2%

Communication Services

HMCT.L
1.4%
IASH.L
1.3%

Real Estate

HMCT.L
0.6%
IASH.L
0.6%

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

HMCT.L vs. IASH.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: 7171
Overall Rank
HMCT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMCT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMCT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
HMCT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMCT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

IASH.L
IASH.L Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
IASH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IASH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
IASH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
IASH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
IASH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

HMCT.L vs. IASH.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 iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.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.LIASH.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

0.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.38

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.71

4.82

-0.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.97

14.12

-0.15

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

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


HMCT.LIASH.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.15

2.15

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.05

-0.05

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

0.05

+0.23

Drawdowns

HMCT.L vs. IASH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCT.L drawdown since its inception was -49.06%, roughly equal to the maximum IASH.L drawdown of -51.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCT.L and IASH.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HMCT.LIASH.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.06%

-51.24%

+2.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.59%

-7.36%

-0.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.40%

-27.85%

-0.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.42%

-44.73%

+0.31%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.89%

-13.53%

+0.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.66%

-31.79%

+10.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.56%

2.52%

+0.04%

Volatility

HMCT.L vs. IASH.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.L) have volatilities of 6.31% and 6.48%, 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


HMCT.LIASH.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.31%

6.48%

-0.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.83%

11.56%

+0.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.66%

16.50%

+0.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.37%

22.73%

-0.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.73%

23.44%

+0.29%

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

HMCT.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than IASH.L's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

HMCT.L vs. IASH.L - Dividend Comparison

HMCT.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%, while IASH.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
HMCT.L
HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF
1.67%1.73%2.03%2.16%1.69%1.12%0.84%1.71%
IASH.L
iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, HMCT.L and IASH.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, HMCT.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMCT.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IASH.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCT.L and 0.40% for IASH.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMCT.L and IASH.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