IDCBY vs. ACGBY
Compare and contrast key facts about Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited (IDCBY) and Agricultural Bank of China PK (ACGBY).
Performance
IDCBY vs. ACGBY - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
IDCBY vs. ACGBY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IDCBY Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited | 8.84% | 32.13% | 47.21% | 3.91% | -2.05% | -6.39% | -12.54% | 13.02% | -8.08% | 42.02% |
ACGBY Agricultural Bank of China PK | -3.71% | 43.43% | 65.14% | 24.56% | 8.26% | 0.75% | -13.39% | 6.94% | -3.48% | 28.00% |
Fundamentals
IDCBY:
$312.57B
ACGBY:
$262.98B
IDCBY:
$19.94
ACGBY:
$19.28
IDCBY:
0.88
ACGBY:
0.92
IDCBY:
1.10
ACGBY:
0.13
IDCBY:
0.21
ACGBY:
0.22
IDCBY:
0.08
ACGBY:
0.09
IDCBY:
$1.49T
ACGBY:
$1.19T
IDCBY:
$665.53B
ACGBY:
$720.58B
IDCBY:
$429.60B
ACGBY:
$327.15B
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IDCBY achieves a 8.84% return, which is significantly higher than ACGBY's -3.71% return. Over the past 10 years, IDCBY has underperformed ACGBY with an annualized return of 12.36%, while ACGBY has yielded a comparatively higher 16.35% annualized return.
IDCBY
- 1D
- -0.90%
- 1M
- 8.34%
- YTD
- 8.84%
- 6M
- 22.14%
- 1Y
- 31.01%
- 3Y*
- 28.30%
- 5Y*
- 12.53%
- 10Y*
- 12.36%
ACGBY
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- 8.22%
- YTD
- -3.71%
- 6M
- 7.91%
- 1Y
- 24.73%
- 3Y*
- 37.57%
- 5Y*
- 22.85%
- 10Y*
- 16.35%
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
IDCBY vs. ACGBY — Risk / Return Rank
IDCBY
ACGBY
IDCBY vs. ACGBY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited (IDCBY) and Agricultural Bank of China PK (ACGBY). 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.
| IDCBY | ACGBY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.56 | 0.99 | +0.57 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.20 | 1.55 | +0.65 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.18 | +0.09 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.45 | 1.27 | +1.18 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.54 | 2.82 | +4.72 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IDCBY | ACGBY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.56 | 0.99 | +0.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 | 1.01 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.54 | 0.69 | -0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | 0.34 | -0.19 |
Correlation
The correlation between IDCBY and ACGBY is 0.66, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Dividends
IDCBY vs. ACGBY - Dividend Comparison
IDCBY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.88%, which matches ACGBY's 4.84% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IDCBY Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited | 4.88% | 7.76% | 6.36% | 8.69% | 8.61% | 7.32% | 4.84% | 3.91% | 4.48% | 3.49% | 12.32% | 7.11% |
ACGBY Agricultural Bank of China PK | 4.84% | 6.83% | 10.53% | 8.42% | 9.62% | 6.83% | 5.86% | 4.84% | 5.45% | 10.15% | 11.73% | 6.06% |
Drawdowns
IDCBY vs. ACGBY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IDCBY drawdown since its inception was -78.73%, which is greater than ACGBY's maximum drawdown of -52.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IDCBY and ACGBY.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| IDCBY | ACGBY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.73% | -52.60% | -26.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.37% | -18.52% | +6.15% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.39% | -21.86% | -8.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.70% | -43.69% | +3.99% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.11% | -10.90% | +7.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -49.49% | -19.77% | -29.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.02% | 8.37% | -4.35% |
Volatility
IDCBY vs. ACGBY - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited (IDCBY) is 6.05%, while Agricultural Bank of China PK (ACGBY) has a volatility of 7.87%. This indicates that IDCBY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACGBY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| IDCBY | ACGBY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.05% | 7.87% | -1.82% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.05% | 16.86% | -3.81% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.96% | 25.15% | -5.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.29% | 22.78% | -1.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.97% | 23.84% | -0.87% |
Financials
IDCBY vs. ACGBY - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited and Agricultural Bank of China PK. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
IDCBY vs. ACGBY - Profitability Comparison
IDCBY - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited reported a gross profit of 360.46B and revenue of 745.00B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 48.4%.
ACGBY - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Agricultural Bank of China PK reported a gross profit of 180.77B and revenue of 338.98B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 53.3%.
IDCBY - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited reported an operating income of 67.55B and revenue of 745.00B, resulting in an operating margin of 9.1%.
ACGBY - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Agricultural Bank of China PK reported an operating income of 88.75B and revenue of 338.98B, resulting in an operating margin of 26.2%.
IDCBY - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited reported a net income of 89.14B and revenue of 745.00B, resulting in a net margin of 12.0%.
ACGBY - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Agricultural Bank of China PK reported a net income of 81.35B and revenue of 338.98B, resulting in a net margin of 24.0%.