ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE
ICHN.AS (iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF) and CNAA.DE (Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds - ICHN.AS tracks the MSCI China NR USD while CNAA.DE tracks the MSCI China A. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ICHN.AS returned -5.22%/yr vs -1.14%/yr for CNAA.DE. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ICHN.AS charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNAA.DE.
Performance
ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ICHN.AS is traded in USD, while CNAA.DE is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the CNAA.DE values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ICHN.AS achieves a -7.22% return, which is significantly lower than CNAA.DE's 8.65% return.
ICHN.AS
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- -2.77%
- YTD
- -7.22%
- 6M
- -8.68%
- 1Y
- 4.44%
- 3Y*
- 10.63%
- 5Y*
- -5.22%
- 10Y*
- —
CNAA.DE
- 1D
- -0.66%
- 1M
- 1.13%
- YTD
- 8.65%
- 6M
- 12.82%
- 1Y
- 36.22%
- 3Y*
- 11.39%
- 5Y*
- -1.14%
- 10Y*
- —
ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICHN.AS iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF | -7.22% | 31.69% | 18.56% | -11.72% | -22.52% | -22.05% | 29.63% | 10.95% |
CNAA.DE Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc | 8.65% | 24.29% | 12.96% | -14.58% | -25.31% | 4.55% | 40.71% | 8.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between ICHN.AS and CNAA.DE is 0.67, 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 | 0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2019 | 0.72 |
The correlation between ICHN.AS and CNAA.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE — Risk / Return Rank
ICHN.AS
CNAA.DE
ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF (ICHN.AS) and Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc (CNAA.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.
| ICHN.AS | CNAA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.86 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.37 | -0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.26 | 4.91 | -4.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.54 | 14.52 | -13.98 |
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
| ICHN.AS | CNAA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 | 2.08 | -1.86 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.18 | -0.05 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.05 | 0.30 | -0.25 |
Drawdowns
ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ICHN.AS drawdown since its inception was -62.67%, which is greater than CNAA.DE's maximum drawdown of -49.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICHN.AS and CNAA.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ICHN.AS | CNAA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -62.67% | -49.71% | -12.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.99% | -7.35% | -9.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.22% | -28.29% | +3.07% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.46% | -44.57% | -11.89% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -35.29% | -14.44% | -20.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.80% | -23.67% | -10.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.21% | 2.49% | +5.72% |
Volatility
ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF (ICHN.AS) has a higher volatility of 7.61% compared to Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc (CNAA.DE) at 6.57%. This indicates that ICHN.AS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNAA.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ICHN.AS | CNAA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.61% | 6.57% | +1.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.71% | 12.09% | +2.62% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.03% | 17.33% | +2.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.04% | 22.70% | +6.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.75% | 23.47% | +5.28% |
ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
ICHN.AS has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CNAA.DE's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
ICHN.AS vs. CNAA.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither ICHN.AS nor CNAA.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
ICHN.AS and CNAA.DE have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNAA.DE is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNAA.DE is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for ICHN.AS.
ICHN.AS tracks MSCI China NR USD, while CNAA.DE tracks MSCI China A. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ICHN.AS and 0.35% for CNAA.DE.
Find the right allocation for ICHN.AS and CNAA.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