IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IQQC.DE (iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF) and H4Z6.DE (HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both China Equities funds - IQQC.DE tracks the FTSE China 50 while H4Z6.DE tracks the MSCI China. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IQQC.DE returned 8.94%/yr vs 7.78%/yr for H4Z6.DE. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IQQC.DE charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for H4Z6.DE.

Performance

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (IQQC.DE) and HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (H4Z6.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IQQC.DE achieves a -7.00% return, which is significantly lower than H4Z6.DE's -6.53% return.

IQQC.DE

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: -3.70%
• YTD: -7.00%
• 6M: -9.66%
• 1Y: -2.21%
• 3Y*: 8.94%
• 5Y*: -2.24%
• 10Y*: 2.69%

H4Z6.DE

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -3.35%
• YTD: -6.53%
• 6M: -9.01%
• 1Y: 2.78%
• 3Y*: 7.78%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IQQC.DE iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF	-7.00%	14.32%	39.12%	-16.33%	-11.72%
H4Z6.DE HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	-6.53%	16.48%	27.04%	-14.63%	-10.19%

Correlation

The correlation between IQQC.DE and H4Z6.DE is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2022	0.97

The correlation between IQQC.DE and H4Z6.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IQQC.DE

IQQC.DE Risk / Return Rank: 8
IQQC.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
IQQC.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
IQQC.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 8
IQQC.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
IQQC.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 8

H4Z6.DE

H4Z6.DE Risk / Return Rank: 11
H4Z6.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
H4Z6.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
H4Z6.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 11
H4Z6.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
H4Z6.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 11

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.

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (IQQC.DE) and HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (H4Z6.DE). 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.

	IQQC.DE	H4Z6.DE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.09	0.17	-0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.01	0.37	-0.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	1.04	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.11	0.18	-0.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.23	0.38	-0.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQQC.DE Sharpe Ratio is -0.09, which is lower than the H4Z6.DE Sharpe Ratio of 0.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IQQC.DE and H4Z6.DE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IQQC.DE	H4Z6.DE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09	0.17	-0.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.08	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.11	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.17	0.06	+0.11

Drawdowns

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IQQC.DE drawdown since its inception was -67.50%, which is greater than H4Z6.DE's maximum drawdown of -33.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQQC.DE and H4Z6.DE.

Drawdown Indicators

	IQQC.DE	H4Z6.DE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.50%	-33.47%	-34.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.24%	-16.85%	+1.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.71%	-24.47%	-3.24%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.35%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-53.92%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.02%	-14.82%	-9.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.16%	-13.91%	-14.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.16%	8.17%	-1.01%

Volatility

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (IQQC.DE) is 6.75%, while HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (H4Z6.DE) has a volatility of 7.23%. This indicates that IQQC.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than H4Z6.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IQQC.DE	H4Z6.DE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.75%	7.23%	-0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.55%	13.11%	-0.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.72%	18.60%	-0.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.20%	25.28%	+2.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.07%	25.28%	-0.21%

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

IQQC.DE has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than H4Z6.DE's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

IQQC.DE vs. H4Z6.DE - Dividend Comparison

IQQC.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, while H4Z6.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
H4Z6.DE HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IQQC.DE iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF	1.92%	1.78%	2.26%	2.52%	2.51%	1.85%	2.51%	2.45%	3.03%	2.38%	2.33%	2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IQQC.DE and H4Z6.DE in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, IQQC.DE and H4Z6.DE move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, IQQC.DE or H4Z6.DE?

On fees, H4Z6.DE is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IQQC.DE or H4Z6.DE?

H4Z6.DE is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for IQQC.DE.

What is the main difference between IQQC.DE and H4Z6.DE?

IQQC.DE tracks FTSE China 50, while H4Z6.DE tracks MSCI China. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for IQQC.DE and 0.28% for H4Z6.DE.