IASH.L vs. CNUA.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IASH.L (iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD) and CNUA.L (UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, from iShares and UBS respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IASH.L returned -0.10%/yr vs 3.76%/yr for CNUA.L. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IASH.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for CNUA.L.

Performance

IASH.L vs. CNUA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.L) and UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IASH.L achieves a 8.70% return, which is significantly lower than CNUA.L's 11.84% return.

IASH.L

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 2.15%
• YTD: 8.70%
• 6M: 11.91%
• 1Y: 36.97%
• 3Y*: 8.52%
• 5Y*: -0.10%
• 10Y*: 7.04%

CNUA.L

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 2.91%
• YTD: 11.84%
• 6M: 15.17%
• 1Y: 44.25%
• 3Y*: 12.83%
• 5Y*: 3.76%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
IASH.L iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD	8.70%	17.67%	12.92%	-18.83%	-17.27%	4.48%	31.23%
CNUA.L UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	11.84%	22.98%	16.55%	-16.32%	-15.85%	10.51%	38.62%

Correlation

The correlation between IASH.L and CNUA.L is 0.98 - 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	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2020	0.84

The correlation between IASH.L and CNUA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.84 (all time) to 0.98 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors	IASH.L	CNUA.L
Technology	31.0%	27.2%
Financial Services	17.8%	18.8%
Industrials	15.5%	15.7%
Basic Materials	11.4%	12.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	7.4%
Consumer Cyclical	5.4%	5.6%
Healthcare	3.9%	4.3%
Utilities	3.2%	3.2%
Energy	3.2%	3.4%
Communication Services	1.3%	1.4%
Real Estate	0.6%	0.6%

Return for Risk

IASH.L vs. CNUA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IASH.L

IASH.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
IASH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
IASH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
IASH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 73
IASH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
IASH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

CNUA.L

CNUA.L Risk / Return Rank: 88
CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CNUA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
CNUA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 84
CNUA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CNUA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

IASH.L vs. CNUA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.L) and UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.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.

	IASH.L	CNUA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.36	2.84	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.18	3.77	-0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.50	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.48	6.63	-1.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.07	19.91	-4.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current IASH.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is comparable to the CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IASH.L and CNUA.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

	IASH.L	CNUA.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.36	2.84	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.00	0.18	-0.18
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.33	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.09	0.41	-0.32

Drawdowns

IASH.L vs. CNUA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IASH.L drawdown since its inception was -48.39%, which is greater than CNUA.L's maximum drawdown of -38.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IASH.L and CNUA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IASH.L	CNUA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.39%	-38.31%	-10.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.72%	-6.64%	-0.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.77%	-21.43%	-4.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.23%	-38.31%	-3.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.67%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.73%	-2.17%	-8.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.71%	-14.93%	-9.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.45%	2.22%	+0.23%

Volatility

IASH.L vs. CNUA.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.L) and UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L) have volatilities of 5.76% and 5.67%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	IASH.L	CNUA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.76%	5.67%	+0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.68%	10.52%	+0.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.60%	15.52%	+0.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.27%	21.25%	+0.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.78%	22.74%	+0.04%

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

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

Dividends

IASH.L vs. CNUA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IASH.L nor CNUA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IASH.L and CNUA.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, IASH.L and CNUA.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.

Which ETF is better, IASH.L or CNUA.L?

On fees, CNUA.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IASH.L or CNUA.L?

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

What is the main difference between IASH.L and CNUA.L?

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