KWE3.L vs. C300.L
KWE3.L (Leverage Shares 3x Long China Tech ETC Securities) and C300.L (Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds. KWE3.L is actively managed, while C300.L is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, KWE3.L returned -40.96%/yr vs 15.49%/yr for C300.L. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KWE3.L charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for C300.L.
Performance
KWE3.L vs. C300.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KWE3.L achieves a -60.11% return, which is significantly lower than C300.L's 12.15% return.
KWE3.L
- 1D
- 10.62%
- 1M
- 2.18%
- 6M
- -67.46%
- YTD
- -60.11%
- 1Y
- -64.29%
- 3Y*
- -40.96%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
C300.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -1.79%
- 6M
- 9.28%
- YTD
- 12.15%
- 1Y
- 38.21%
- 3Y*
- 15.49%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KWE3.L vs. C300.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KWE3.L Leverage Shares 3x Long China Tech ETC Securities | -60.11% | 11.51% | -22.87% | -61.90% | -33.55% |
C300.L Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc | 12.15% | 33.78% | 14.79% | -11.81% | 1.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between KWE3.L and C300.L is 0.52, 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 | 0.52 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2022 | 0.61 |
The correlation between KWE3.L and C300.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
KWE3.L vs. C300.L — Risk / Return Rank
KWE3.L
C300.L
KWE3.L vs. C300.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 3x Long China Tech ETC Securities (KWE3.L) and Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.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.
| KWE3.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.73 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.87 | 1.34 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.75 | 5.02 | -5.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.23 | 14.57 | -15.80 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
KWE3.L vs. C300.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KWE3.L drawdown since its inception was -99.29%, which is greater than C300.L's maximum drawdown of -31.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KWE3.L and C300.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KWE3.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.29% | -31.77% | -67.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -85.64% | -7.64% | -78.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -88.36% | -28.06% | -60.30% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -98.95% | -4.93% | -94.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -92.04% | -13.81% | -78.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 52.38% | 2.63% | +49.75% |
Volatility
KWE3.L vs. C300.L - Volatility Comparison
Leverage Shares 3x Long China Tech ETC Securities (KWE3.L) has a higher volatility of 24.10% compared to Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L) at 9.15%. This indicates that KWE3.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than C300.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KWE3.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 24.10% | 9.15% | +14.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 63.99% | 15.26% | +48.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 82.22% | 19.76% | +62.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 134.82% | 22.34% | +112.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 134.82% | 22.34% | +112.48% |
KWE3.L vs. C300.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
KWE3.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than C300.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
KWE3.L vs. C300.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither KWE3.L nor C300.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
KWE3.L and C300.L have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, C300.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
C300.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for KWE3.L.
They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for KWE3.L and 0.35% for C300.L.
Find the right allocation for KWE3.L and C300.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