ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE
ICGB.DE (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and EUNA.DE (iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - ICGB.DE is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while EUNA.DE is a Global Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond (EUR Hedged). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ICGB.DE returned 3.84%/yr vs -1.36%/yr for EUNA.DE. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. ICGB.DE charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for EUNA.DE.
Performance
ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ICGB.DE achieves a 7.85% return, which is significantly higher than EUNA.DE's -0.40% return.
ICGB.DE
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 1.25%
- 6M
- 7.38%
- YTD
- 7.85%
- 1Y
- 9.80%
- 3Y*
- 4.28%
- 5Y*
- 3.84%
- 10Y*
- —
EUNA.DE
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 0.41%
- 6M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- -0.40%
- 1Y
- 0.82%
- 3Y*
- 2.34%
- 5Y*
- -1.36%
- 10Y*
- —
ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 7.85% | -7.16% | 11.36% | -2.27% | 1.10% | 17.31% | 0.08% | -10.15% |
EUNA.DE iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc | -0.40% | 2.91% | 1.48% | 4.41% | -13.52% | -2.42% | 3.86% | 0.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between ICGB.DE and EUNA.DE is -0.25, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.25 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.16 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019 | -0.09 |
The correlation between ICGB.DE and EUNA.DE shifts across timeframes, from -0.25 (1 year) to -0.09 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE — Risk / Return Rank
ICGB.DE
EUNA.DE
ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) and iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc (EUNA.DE). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ICGB.DE | EUNA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.04 | +0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.52 | 0.29 | +3.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.25 | 0.78 | +8.47 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ICGB.DE drawdown since its inception was -13.36%, smaller than the maximum EUNA.DE drawdown of -17.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICGB.DE and EUNA.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ICGB.DE | EUNA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.36% | -17.81% | +4.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.77% | -2.80% | +0.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.17% | -4.11% | -7.06% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.36% | -17.04% | +3.68% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.82% | -8.53% | +6.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.42% | -6.71% | +0.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.06% | 1.05% | +0.01% |
Volatility
ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE - Volatility Comparison
iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) has a higher volatility of 1.34% compared to iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc (EUNA.DE) at 0.86%. This indicates that ICGB.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EUNA.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ICGB.DE | EUNA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.34% | 0.86% | +0.48% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.71% | 2.83% | +0.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.38% | 3.73% | +1.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.64% | 4.84% | +1.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.91% | 4.44% | +3.47% |
ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
ICGB.DE has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than EUNA.DE's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
ICGB.DE vs. EUNA.DE - Dividend Comparison
ICGB.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%, while EUNA.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EUNA.DE iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.69% | 1.92% | 2.22% | 2.58% | 2.80% | 2.71% | 2.63% | 0.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ICGB.DE and EUNA.DE have a correlation of -0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EUNA.DE is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EUNA.DE is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for ICGB.DE.
ICGB.DE is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while EUNA.DE is Global Bonds. ICGB.DE tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while EUNA.DE tracks Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond (EUR Hedged). Their fees differ too: 0.35% for ICGB.DE and 0.10% for EUNA.DE.
Find the right allocation for ICGB.DE and EUNA.DE
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