ISVBF vs. GXC
ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and GXC (SPDR S&P China ETF) are both China Equities funds - ISVBF tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index while GXC tracks the S&P China BMI Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ISVBF returned -2.48%/yr vs -2.07%/yr for GXC. Their 0.35 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for GXC.
Performance
ISVBF vs. GXC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISVBF achieves a -6.75% return, which is significantly lower than GXC's -4.31% return.
ISVBF
- 1D
- -0.66%
- 1M
- 9.06%
- 6M
- -8.63%
- YTD
- -6.75%
- 1Y
- -0.99%
- 3Y*
- 8.45%
- 5Y*
- -2.48%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -4.43%
GXC
- 1D
- 0.45%
- 1M
- 6.70%
- 6M
- -7.67%
- YTD
- -4.31%
- 1Y
- 2.37%
- 3Y*
- 8.44%
- 5Y*
- -2.07%
- 10Y*
- 4.52%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.96%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.43M | $2.64M | $2.48M | |
| $147.49K | $255.95K | $315.23K |
ISVBF vs. GXC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -6.75% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | -4.31% | 30.84% | 14.60% | -9.93% | -22.12% | -19.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISVBF and GXC is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.52 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021 | 0.35 |
Over the past year, ISVBF and GXC have become more correlated (0.66) than their long-term average of 0.35, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
ISVBF vs. GXC — Risk / Return Rank
ISVBF
GXC
ISVBF vs. GXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) and SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC). 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.
| ISVBF | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 1.04 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | 0.13 | -0.18 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.09 | 0.28 | -0.37 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ISVBF vs. GXC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, smaller than the maximum GXC drawdown of -71.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and GXC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISVBF | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.78% | -71.96% | +18.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.14% | -17.77% | -6.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.14% | -25.54% | +1.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -46.06% | -48.78% | +2.72% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -60.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.42% | -32.38% | +7.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.57% | -28.86% | -3.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.23% | 8.57% | +2.66% |
Volatility
ISVBF vs. GXC - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a higher volatility of 6.46% compared to SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) at 4.85%. This indicates that ISVBF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISVBF | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.46% | 4.85% | +1.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.45% | 13.69% | +12.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.60% | 19.37% | +12.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.08% | 28.69% | +1.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.06% | 26.06% | +4.00% |
ISVBF vs. GXC - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than GXC's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISVBF vs. GXC - Dividend Comparison
ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.16%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | 2.16% | 2.40% | 2.81% | 3.70% | 2.67% | 1.35% | 1.04% | 1.60% | 2.03% | 1.84% | 2.05% | 2.85% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 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
ISVBF and GXC have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ISVBF has higher volatility (6.46%) compared to GXC (4.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs GXC's -71.96%.
On 5-year performance, GXC leads with -2.07% vs -2.48% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, GXC has been the lower-risk option at 4.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GXC has performed better with a -2.07% return vs -2.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for GXC.
GXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.16%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while GXC tracks S&P China BMI Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.59% for GXC.
GXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.12 vs -0.03), 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 ISVBF and GXC
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