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 -5.16%/yr vs -4.55%/yr for GXC. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. 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 -6.46% return, which is significantly lower than GXC's -3.93% return.
ISVBF
- 1D
- -2.03%
- 1M
- -2.58%
- YTD
- -6.46%
- 6M
- -7.93%
- 1Y
- 7.29%
- 3Y*
- 9.94%
- 5Y*
- -5.16%
- 10Y*
- —
GXC
- 1D
- -2.27%
- 1M
- -2.82%
- YTD
- -3.93%
- 6M
- -5.13%
- 1Y
- 12.26%
- 3Y*
- 10.65%
- 5Y*
- -4.55%
- 10Y*
- 5.25%
ISVBF vs. GXC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -6.46% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | -3.93% | 30.84% | 14.60% | -9.93% | -22.12% | -19.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISVBF and GXC is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2021 | 0.34 |
Over the past year, ISVBF and GXC have become more correlated (0.66) than their long-term average of 0.34, 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.
| ISVBF | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.41 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.13 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.38 | 0.90 | -0.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.89 | 2.02 | -1.13 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ISVBF | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 | 0.65 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.17 | -0.16 | -0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.20 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.15 | 0.16 | -0.31 |
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 | -19.18% | -13.73% | -5.45% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.77% | -25.54% | +1.77% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.22% | -53.99% | +0.77% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -60.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.18% | -32.10% | +7.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.76% | -28.82% | -3.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.21% | 6.09% | +2.12% |
Volatility
ISVBF vs. GXC - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a higher volatility of 10.81% compared to SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) at 6.64%. 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 | 10.81% | 6.64% | +4.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.55% | 13.59% | +12.96% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 30.57% | 18.88% | +11.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.20% | 28.97% | +1.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.21% | 26.09% | +4.12% |
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 2.50%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | 2.50% | 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 (10.81%) compared to GXC (6.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs GXC's -71.96%.
On 5-year performance, GXC leads with -4.55% vs -5.16% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, GXC has been the lower-risk option at 6.64%. 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 -4.55% return vs -5.16%. 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 2.50%, 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 (0.65 vs 0.24), 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