PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L

Last updated Jul 17, 2026
Documentation

IFFF.L (iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF) and XCHA.L (Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - IFFF.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while XCHA.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IFFF.L returned 9.54%/yr vs 8.31%/yr for XCHA.L. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IFFF.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for XCHA.L.

Performance

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF (IFFF.L) and Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IFFF.L is traded in GBp, while XCHA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XCHA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFFF.L achieves a 26.52% return, which is significantly higher than XCHA.L's 7.46% return. Over the past 10 years, IFFF.L has outperformed XCHA.L with an annualized return of 9.54%, while XCHA.L has yielded a comparatively lower 8.31% annualized return.

IFFF.L

1D
-1.56%
1M
-7.37%
6M
16.48%
YTD
26.52%
1Y
47.83%
3Y*
22.82%
5Y*
7.65%
10Y*
9.54%

XCHA.L

1D
-1.67%
1M
-3.65%
6M
3.05%
YTD
7.46%
1Y
30.49%
3Y*
12.63%
5Y*
2.69%
10Y*
8.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IFFF.L
iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF		26.52%30.77%13.56%-4.04%-12.39%-8.11%21.66%13.62%-10.17%28.81%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		7.46%20.84%18.03%-15.45%-15.25%4.22%41.57%35.22%-19.77%23.51%

Correlation

The correlation between IFFF.L and XCHA.L is 0.58, 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

0.58

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.59

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2012

0.64

The correlation between IFFF.L and XCHA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IFFF.L
XCHA.L

Technology

55.0%
31.6%

Financial Services

13.9%
18.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.5%
6.2%

Industrials

6.8%
16.0%

Communication Services

6.0%
1.5%

Basic Materials

2.3%
9.1%

Healthcare

2.0%
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

1.5%
6.6%

Real Estate

1.5%
0.4%

Energy

1.3%
2.7%

Utilities

1.2%
2.9%

Technology

IFFF.L
55.0%
XCHA.L
31.6%

Financial Services

IFFF.L
13.9%
XCHA.L
18.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IFFF.L
8.5%
XCHA.L
6.2%

Industrials

IFFF.L
6.8%
XCHA.L
16.0%

Communication Services

IFFF.L
6.0%
XCHA.L
1.5%

Basic Materials

IFFF.L
2.3%
XCHA.L
9.1%

Healthcare

IFFF.L
2.0%
XCHA.L
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

IFFF.L
1.5%
XCHA.L
6.6%

Real Estate

IFFF.L
1.5%
XCHA.L
0.4%

Energy

IFFF.L
1.3%
XCHA.L
2.7%

Utilities

IFFF.L
1.2%
XCHA.L
2.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF

Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C

Often compared with IFFF.L:
IFFF.L vs. XDEW.DEIFFF.L vs. VOOIFFF.L vs. VFEA.DEIFFF.L vs. IKOR.LIFFF.L vs. ASDV.LIFFF.L vs. CP9U.LIFFF.L vs. XKS2.L
Often compared with XCHA.L:
XCHA.L vs. ASHRXCHA.L vs. CSPX.LXCHA.L vs. VUAA.DEXCHA.L vs. HMCT.LXCHA.L vs. CC1U.LXCHA.L vs. CA3S.LXCHA.L vs. XCNA.L

Return for Risk

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IFFF.L
IFFF.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
IFFF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
XCHA.L
XCHA.L Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF (IFFF.L) and Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.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.

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.

IFFF.LXCHA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.10
1.61

+0.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.67
2.22

+0.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.29

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.90

3.59

+0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.81

11.30

+0.50

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFFF.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is higher than the XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFFF.L and XCHA.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.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFFF.L drawdown since its inception was -72.71%, which is greater than XCHA.L's maximum drawdown of -47.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFFF.L and XCHA.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IFFF.LXCHA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-72.71%

-47.44%

-25.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.19%

-8.46%

-3.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.69%

-24.79%

+5.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.46%

-36.94%

+4.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.63%

-39.50%

-0.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.19%

-8.46%

-3.73%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-23.53%

-18.38%

-5.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.04%

2.69%

+1.35%

Volatility

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF (IFFF.L) has a higher volatility of 10.82% compared to Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) at 8.64%. This indicates that IFFF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XCHA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IFFF.LXCHA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.82%

8.64%

+2.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.01%

14.35%

+5.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.63%

18.85%

+3.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.89%

21.74%

-1.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.39%

22.57%

-3.18%

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFFF.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than XCHA.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFFF.L vs. XCHA.L - Dividend Comparison

IFFF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, while XCHA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IFFF.L
iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF		1.11%1.45%1.80%1.88%2.10%1.36%1.19%1.75%1.98%1.54%1.77%2.22%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		0.00%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

IFFF.L and XCHA.L have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XCHA.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XCHA.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for IFFF.L.

IFFF.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XCHA.L is China Equities. IFFF.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while XCHA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for IFFF.L and 0.50% for XCHA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IFFF.L and XCHA.L

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