PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LCCN.L vs. FXC.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L) and iShares China Large Cap UCITS (FXC.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

LCCN.L is traded in USD, while FXC.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the FXC.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with LCCN.L having a -7.04% return and FXC.L slightly lower at -7.07%.


LCCN.L

1D
-0.13%
1M
-2.64%
YTD
-7.04%
6M
-8.41%
1Y
5.00%
3Y*
11.02%
5Y*
-4.89%
10Y*

FXC.L

1D
-0.08%
1M
-2.62%
YTD
-7.07%
6M
-8.17%
1Y
1.01%
3Y*
12.80%
5Y*
-2.43%
10Y*
3.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
LCCN.L
Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc
-7.04%32.04%19.37%-11.61%-22.21%-21.87%29.79%21.86%1.99%
FXC.L
iShares China Large Cap UCITS
-7.07%29.59%31.55%-13.53%-20.23%-19.62%10.91%14.58%1.91%

Correlation

The correlation between LCCN.L and FXC.L is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.94

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.96

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 1, 2018

0.94

The correlation between LCCN.L and FXC.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LCCN.L
FXC.L

Consumer Cyclical

26.4%
26.6%

Financial Services

19.1%
34.7%

Communication Services

18.8%
16.2%

Technology

9.6%
5.4%

Basic Materials

5.5%
4.1%

Healthcare

5.4%
2.3%

Industrials

5.0%
3.1%

Energy

3.7%
5.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
0.9%

Utilities

1.7%
0.4%

Real Estate

1.5%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

LCCN.L
26.4%
FXC.L
26.6%

Financial Services

LCCN.L
19.1%
FXC.L
34.7%

Communication Services

LCCN.L
18.8%
FXC.L
16.2%

Technology

LCCN.L
9.6%
FXC.L
5.4%

Basic Materials

LCCN.L
5.5%
FXC.L
4.1%

Healthcare

LCCN.L
5.4%
FXC.L
2.3%

Industrials

LCCN.L
5.0%
FXC.L
3.1%

Energy

LCCN.L
3.7%
FXC.L
5.2%

Consumer Defensive

LCCN.L
3.2%
FXC.L
0.9%

Utilities

LCCN.L
1.7%
FXC.L
0.4%

Real Estate

LCCN.L
1.5%
FXC.L
1.1%

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

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCCN.L
LCCN.L Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
LCCN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCCN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCCN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
LCCN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCCN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

FXC.L
FXC.L Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
FXC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FXC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
FXC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1010
Omega Ratio Rank
FXC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
FXC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L) and iShares China Large Cap UCITS (FXC.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.


LCCN.LFXC.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

1.02

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.29

0.06

+0.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.61

0.14

+0.47

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCCN.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.25, which is higher than the FXC.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCCN.L and FXC.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LCCN.LFXC.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.25

0.05

+0.19

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.17

-0.08

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.11

0.07

+0.04

Drawdowns

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCCN.L drawdown since its inception was -62.38%, smaller than the maximum FXC.L drawdown of -70.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCCN.L and FXC.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LCCN.LFXC.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.38%

-70.48%

+8.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.98%

-15.73%

-1.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.52%

-28.24%

+2.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.10%

-54.09%

-2.01%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-60.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-34.07%

-24.27%

-9.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.16%

-31.12%

+0.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.15%

7.37%

+0.78%

Volatility

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L) has a higher volatility of 8.04% compared to iShares China Large Cap UCITS (FXC.L) at 7.40%. This indicates that LCCN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FXC.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LCCN.LFXC.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.04%

7.40%

+0.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.66%

13.62%

+1.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.12%

18.91%

+1.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.33%

29.86%

-0.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.88%

26.08%

+1.80%

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCCN.L has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than FXC.L's 0.74% expense ratio.


Dividends

LCCN.L vs. FXC.L - Dividend Comparison

LCCN.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FXC.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FXC.L
iShares China Large Cap UCITS
2.58%2.37%2.99%3.10%2.85%2.51%3.26%3.22%3.89%3.18%3.04%4.00%
LCCN.L
Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - 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%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, LCCN.L and FXC.L 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.

On fees, LCCN.L is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LCCN.L is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FXC.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for LCCN.L and 0.74% for FXC.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LCCN.L and FXC.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