HMCT.L vs. XCX6.L
HMCT.L (HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF) and XCX6.L (Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds - HMCT.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY while XCX6.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMCT.L returned -1.01%/yr vs -5.52%/yr for XCX6.L. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HMCT.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for XCX6.L.
Performance
HMCT.L vs. XCX6.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
HMCT.L is traded in USD, while XCX6.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XCX6.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HMCT.L achieves a 8.61% return, which is significantly higher than XCX6.L's -7.75% return.
HMCT.L
- 1D
- -0.59%
- 1M
- 0.85%
- YTD
- 8.61%
- 6M
- 12.34%
- 1Y
- 35.90%
- 3Y*
- 11.42%
- 5Y*
- -1.01%
- 10Y*
- —
XCX6.L
- 1D
- -0.35%
- 1M
- -2.61%
- YTD
- -7.75%
- 6M
- -8.86%
- 1Y
- 4.17%
- 3Y*
- 10.09%
- 5Y*
- -5.52%
- 10Y*
- 4.63%
HMCT.L vs. XCX6.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% |
XCX6.L Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C | -7.75% | 31.66% | 18.56% | -12.72% | -22.62% | -21.96% | 28.87% | 22.27% | -16.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between HMCT.L and XCX6.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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2018 | 0.77 |
The correlation between HMCT.L and XCX6.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.
HMCT.L vs. XCX6.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Utilities
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Financial Services
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Industrials
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Basic Materials
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Consumer Defensive
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Consumer Cyclical
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Healthcare
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Energy
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Utilities
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Communication Services
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
Real Estate
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
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. XCX6.L — Risk / Return Rank
HMCT.L
XCX6.L
HMCT.L vs. XCX6.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 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.
| HMCT.L | XCX6.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.05 | +0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.71 | 0.24 | +4.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.97 | 0.49 | +13.47 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HMCT.L | XCX6.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.15 | 0.21 | +1.93 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.05 | -0.19 | +0.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.18 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.28 | 0.09 | +0.19 |
Drawdowns
HMCT.L vs. XCX6.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HMCT.L drawdown since its inception was -49.06%, smaller than the maximum XCX6.L drawdown of -62.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCT.L and XCX6.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HMCT.L | XCX6.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.06% | -62.80% | +13.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.59% | -17.45% | +9.86% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.40% | -25.62% | -2.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.42% | -56.61% | +12.19% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -62.80% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.89% | -36.32% | +23.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.66% | -24.25% | +2.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.56% | 8.44% | -5.88% |
Volatility
HMCT.L vs. XCX6.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) is 6.31%, while Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C (XCX6.L) has a volatility of 7.73%. This indicates that HMCT.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCX6.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HMCT.L | XCX6.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.31% | 7.73% | -1.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.83% | 14.12% | -2.29% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.66% | 19.45% | -2.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.37% | 29.47% | -7.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.73% | 26.33% | -2.60% |
HMCT.L vs. XCX6.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
HMCT.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than XCX6.L's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
HMCT.L vs. XCX6.L - Dividend Comparison
HMCT.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%, while XCX6.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HMCT.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF | 1.67% | 1.73% | 2.03% | 2.16% | 1.69% | 1.12% | 0.84% | 1.71% |
XCX6.L Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HMCT.L and XCX6.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, 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 0.65% for XCX6.L.
HMCT.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while XCX6.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCT.L and 0.65% for XCX6.L.
Find the right allocation for HMCT.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