IPAC vs. ASHR
IPAC (iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF) and ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IPAC is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index, while ASHR is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 300 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IPAC returned 8.77%/yr vs 4.74%/yr for ASHR. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IPAC charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASHR.
Performance
IPAC vs. ASHR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IPAC achieves a 13.28% return, which is significantly higher than ASHR's 5.02% return. Over the past 10 years, IPAC has outperformed ASHR with an annualized return of 8.77%, while ASHR has yielded a comparatively lower 4.74% annualized return.
IPAC
- 1D
- -1.50%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- 6M
- 8.51%
- YTD
- 13.28%
- 1Y
- 27.10%
- 3Y*
- 15.99%
- 5Y*
- 7.79%
- 10Y*
- 8.77%
ASHR
- 1D
- -2.49%
- 1M
- -2.29%
- 6M
- 0.47%
- YTD
- 5.02%
- 1Y
- 25.58%
- 3Y*
- 10.02%
- 5Y*
- -1.22%
- 10Y*
- 4.74%
IPAC vs. ASHR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF | 13.28% | 25.16% | 6.18% | 14.51% | -13.68% | 3.09% | 12.39% | 19.44% | -12.78% | 25.97% |
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 5.02% | 27.02% | 11.95% | -12.52% | -27.52% | -1.57% | 36.29% | 36.50% | -28.45% | 33.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between IPAC and ASHR is 0.50, 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 | 0.50 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2014 | 0.46 |
The correlation between IPAC and ASHR shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (3 years) to 0.50 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
IPAC vs. ASHR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IPAC
ASHR
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Real Estate
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Energy
Financial Services
IPAC
ASHR
Industrials
IPAC
ASHR
Technology
IPAC
ASHR
Consumer Cyclical
IPAC
ASHR
Basic Materials
IPAC
ASHR
Healthcare
IPAC
ASHR
Real Estate
IPAC
ASHR
Communication Services
IPAC
ASHR
Consumer Defensive
IPAC
ASHR
Utilities
IPAC
ASHR
Energy
IPAC
ASHR
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
IPAC vs. ASHR — Risk / Return Rank
IPAC
ASHR
IPAC vs. ASHR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR). 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.
| IPAC | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.24 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.37 | 3.34 | -0.97 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.37 | 9.00 | -0.63 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IPAC vs. ASHR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IPAC drawdown since its inception was -30.99%, smaller than the maximum ASHR drawdown of -51.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAC and ASHR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IPAC | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.99% | -51.30% | +20.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.49% | -7.69% | -3.80% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.45% | -33.12% | +17.67% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.64% | -44.10% | +14.46% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.99% | -51.30% | +20.31% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.53% | -19.53% | +17.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.43% | -29.07% | +21.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.24% | 2.85% | +0.39% |
Volatility
IPAC vs. ASHR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) is 5.94%, while Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) has a volatility of 8.70%. This indicates that IPAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASHR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IPAC | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.94% | 8.70% | -2.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.54% | 14.34% | +0.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.38% | 18.94% | -1.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.81% | 24.11% | -7.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.60% | 24.15% | -7.55% |
IPAC vs. ASHR - Expense Ratio Comparison
IPAC has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than ASHR's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
IPAC vs. ASHR - Dividend Comparison
IPAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.90%, more than ASHR's 2.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 2.20% | 2.31% | 1.13% | 2.48% | 1.13% | 0.88% | 0.81% | 0.98% | 1.32% | 0.84% | 0.73% | 30.13% |
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF | 3.90% | 4.32% | 3.43% | 3.16% | 2.76% | 4.03% | 1.68% | 3.37% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 2.66% | 2.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IPAC and ASHR have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ASHR has higher volatility (8.70%) compared to IPAC (5.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAC dropped -30.99% vs ASHR's -51.30%.
On 10-year performance, IPAC leads with 8.77% vs 4.74% for ASHR. On fees, IPAC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, IPAC has been the lower-risk option at 5.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IPAC has performed better with a 8.77% return vs 4.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IPAC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHR.
IPAC has the higher dividend yield at 3.90%, compared with 2.20% for ASHR.
IPAC is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while ASHR is China Equities. IPAC tracks MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index, while ASHR tracks CSI 300 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for IPAC and 0.65% for ASHR.
IPAC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 1.36), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for IPAC and ASHR
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