LCCN.L vs. XCNA.L
LCCN.L (Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc) and XCNA.L (Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds - LCCN.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while XCNA.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LCCN.L returned 11.02%/yr vs 15.32%/yr for XCNA.L. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.29% expense ratio.
Performance
LCCN.L vs. XCNA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LCCN.L achieves a -7.04% return, which is significantly lower than XCNA.L's 10.97% return.
LCCN.L
- 1D
- -0.13%
- 1M
- -2.64%
- YTD
- -7.04%
- 6M
- -8.41%
- 1Y
- 5.00%
- 3Y*
- 11.02%
- 5Y*
- -4.89%
- 10Y*
- —
XCNA.L
- 1D
- -0.86%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 10.97%
- 6M
- 15.66%
- 1Y
- 42.13%
- 3Y*
- 15.32%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LCCN.L vs. XCNA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LCCN.L Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc | -7.04% | 32.04% | 19.37% | -11.61% | -9.26% |
XCNA.L Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C | 10.97% | 32.54% | 14.47% | -12.47% | 11.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between LCCN.L and XCNA.L is 0.72, 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 | 0.72 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2022 | 0.77 |
The correlation between LCCN.L and XCNA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.77 - 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
LCCN.L vs. XCNA.L — Risk / Return Rank
LCCN.L
XCNA.L
LCCN.L vs. XCNA.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 Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCNA.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.L | XCNA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.97 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.45 | -0.39 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.29 | 6.61 | -6.31 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.61 | 19.46 | -18.85 |
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
| LCCN.L | XCNA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.25 | 2.54 | -2.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.17 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.11 | 0.55 | -0.44 |
Drawdowns
LCCN.L vs. XCNA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LCCN.L drawdown since its inception was -62.38%, which is greater than XCNA.L's maximum drawdown of -32.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCCN.L and XCNA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LCCN.L | XCNA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -62.38% | -32.05% | -30.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.98% | -6.35% | -10.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.52% | -27.66% | +2.14% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.10% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.07% | -3.09% | -30.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.16% | -14.27% | -15.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.15% | 2.16% | +5.99% |
Volatility
LCCN.L vs. XCNA.L - Volatility Comparison
Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L) has a higher volatility of 8.04% compared to Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCNA.L) at 6.12%. This indicates that LCCN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XCNA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LCCN.L | XCNA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.04% | 6.12% | +1.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.66% | 11.35% | +3.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.12% | 16.53% | +3.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.33% | 24.45% | +4.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.88% | 24.45% | +3.43% |
LCCN.L vs. XCNA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both LCCN.L and XCNA.L have an expense ratio of 0.29%.
Dividends
LCCN.L vs. XCNA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither LCCN.L nor XCNA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
LCCN.L and XCNA.L have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.29% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LCCN.L and XCNA.L have the same expense ratio: 0.29% per year.
LCCN.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while XCNA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and DWS.
Find the right allocation for LCCN.L and XCNA.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