ICHN.AS vs. CNYA
ICHN.AS (iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both China Equities funds from iShares - ICHN.AS tracks the MSCI China NR USD while CNYA tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ICHN.AS returned -5.12%/yr vs -1.06%/yr for CNYA. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ICHN.AS charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.
Performance
ICHN.AS vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ICHN.AS achieves a -6.77% return, which is significantly lower than CNYA's 9.30% return.
ICHN.AS
- 1D
- -2.47%
- 1M
- -2.49%
- YTD
- -6.77%
- 6M
- -7.98%
- 1Y
- 7.08%
- 3Y*
- 10.39%
- 5Y*
- -5.12%
- 10Y*
- —
CNYA
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 2.34%
- YTD
- 9.30%
- 6M
- 13.79%
- 1Y
- 37.95%
- 3Y*
- 11.00%
- 5Y*
- -1.06%
- 10Y*
- —
ICHN.AS vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICHN.AS iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF | -6.77% | 31.69% | 18.56% | -11.72% | -22.52% | -22.05% | 29.63% | 10.95% |
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 9.30% | 26.48% | 10.78% | -13.76% | -26.51% | 3.53% | 41.54% | 9.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between ICHN.AS and CNYA is 0.65, 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 | 0.65 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2019 | 0.65 |
The correlation between ICHN.AS and CNYA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.69 - 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. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank
ICHN.AS
CNYA
ICHN.AS vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF (ICHN.AS) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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 | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.40 | -0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.41 | 5.02 | -4.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.86 | 14.84 | -13.97 |
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 | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 | 2.20 | -1.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.17 | -0.04 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.06 | 0.28 | -0.22 |
Drawdowns
ICHN.AS vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ICHN.AS drawdown since its inception was -62.67%, which is greater than CNYA's maximum drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICHN.AS and CNYA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ICHN.AS | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -62.67% | -49.49% | -13.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.99% | -7.59% | -9.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.22% | -33.35% | +8.13% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.46% | -44.70% | -11.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.97% | -13.42% | -21.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.79% | -20.69% | -13.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.15% | 2.56% | +5.59% |
Volatility
ICHN.AS vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF (ICHN.AS) has a higher volatility of 7.91% compared to iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) at 6.42%. This indicates that ICHN.AS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ICHN.AS | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.91% | 6.42% | +1.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.75% | 12.30% | +2.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.04% | 17.32% | +2.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.04% | 23.81% | +5.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.76% | 23.56% | +5.20% |
ICHN.AS vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison
ICHN.AS has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
ICHN.AS vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison
ICHN.AS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 1.75% | 1.92% | 2.51% | 4.23% | 2.69% | 1.11% | 1.06% | 1.21% | 3.92% | 0.97% | 1.38% |
ICHN.AS iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ICHN.AS and CNYA have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ICHN.AS is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ICHN.AS is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNYA.
ICHN.AS tracks MSCI China NR USD, while CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ICHN.AS and 0.60% for CNYA.
Find the right allocation for ICHN.AS and CNYA
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