INXG.L vs. CNYB.L
INXG.L (iShares £ Index-Linked Gilts UCITS ETF) and CNYB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - INXG.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg UK Government Inflation-Linked Bond Index, while CNYB.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, INXG.L returned -8.92%/yr vs 3.58%/yr for CNYB.L. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. INXG.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNYB.L.
Performance
INXG.L vs. CNYB.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, INXG.L achieves a -0.73% return, which is significantly lower than CNYB.L's 5.08% return.
INXG.L
- 1D
- 0.65%
- 1M
- -0.64%
- 6M
- -2.62%
- YTD
- -0.73%
- 1Y
- 2.93%
- 3Y*
- -0.77%
- 5Y*
- -8.92%
- 10Y*
- -2.12%
CNYB.L
- 1D
- 0.23%
- 1M
- -0.13%
- 6M
- 4.82%
- YTD
- 5.08%
- 1Y
- 7.11%
- 3Y*
- 4.85%
- 5Y*
- 3.58%
- 10Y*
- —
INXG.L vs. CNYB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INXG.L iShares £ Index-Linked Gilts UCITS ETF | -0.73% | 1.10% | -8.60% | 0.16% | -34.28% | 4.03% | 11.12% | -4.24% |
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 5.08% | -2.20% | 6.65% | -4.09% | 6.21% | 9.69% | -19.80% | 0.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between INXG.L and CNYB.L is -0.20, 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 | -0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019 | -0.01 |
The correlation between INXG.L and CNYB.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to -0.01 (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
INXG.L vs. CNYB.L — Risk / Return Rank
INXG.L
CNYB.L
INXG.L vs. CNYB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares £ Index-Linked Gilts UCITS ETF (INXG.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.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.
| INXG.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.82 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.21 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.44 | 2.57 | -2.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.01 | 6.13 | -5.11 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
INXG.L vs. CNYB.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INXG.L drawdown since its inception was -50.86%, which is greater than CNYB.L's maximum drawdown of -25.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INXG.L and CNYB.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INXG.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.86% | -25.82% | -25.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.59% | -2.75% | -3.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.06% | -9.03% | -6.03% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -50.86% | -15.44% | -35.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -50.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -43.48% | -7.25% | -36.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.07% | -12.53% | +0.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.89% | 1.16% | +1.73% |
Volatility
INXG.L vs. CNYB.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares £ Index-Linked Gilts UCITS ETF (INXG.L) has a higher volatility of 2.47% compared to iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) at 1.68%. This indicates that INXG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNYB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| INXG.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.47% | 1.68% | +0.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.14% | 4.69% | +2.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.64% | 6.29% | +3.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.08% | 7.66% | +12.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.39% | 11.48% | +5.91% |
INXG.L vs. CNYB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
INXG.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
INXG.L vs. CNYB.L - Dividend Comparison
INXG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.62%, more than CNYB.L's 1.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.72% | 1.89% | 2.24% | 2.55% | 2.72% | 2.74% | 2.65% | 0.72% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
INXG.L iShares £ Index-Linked Gilts UCITS ETF | 7.62% | 7.23% | 5.77% | 0.43% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.61% | 1.36% | 1.95% | 1.28% | 0.65% | 1.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
INXG.L and CNYB.L have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, INXG.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
INXG.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNYB.L.
INXG.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while CNYB.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. INXG.L tracks Bloomberg UK Government Inflation-Linked Bond Index, while CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for INXG.L and 0.35% for CNYB.L.
Find the right allocation for INXG.L and CNYB.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