LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L
LUTR.L (SPDR Bloomberg 10+ Year US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF) and CNYB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - LUTR.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Treasury 10+ Year Index, while CNYB.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LUTR.L returned -6.38%/yr vs 3.11%/yr for CNYB.L. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LUTR.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNYB.L.
Performance
LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
LUTR.L is traded in USD, while CNYB.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the CNYB.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LUTR.L achieves a -1.40% return, which is significantly lower than CNYB.L's 5.03% return.
LUTR.L
- 1D
- 0.65%
- 1M
- -1.45%
- 6M
- -1.35%
- YTD
- -1.40%
- 1Y
- 4.34%
- 3Y*
- -0.82%
- 5Y*
- -6.38%
- 10Y*
- -1.60%
CNYB.L
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.85%
- 6M
- 4.87%
- YTD
- 5.03%
- 1Y
- 7.39%
- 3Y*
- 5.95%
- 5Y*
- 3.11%
- 10Y*
- —
LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LUTR.L SPDR Bloomberg 10+ Year US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF | -1.40% | 5.45% | -5.75% | 2.50% | -28.87% | -4.84% | 16.57% | 4.82% |
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 5.03% | 5.18% | 4.87% | 0.97% | -5.14% | 8.69% | -17.34% | 6.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between LUTR.L and CNYB.L is 0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019 | 0.04 |
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
LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L — Risk / Return Rank
LUTR.L
CNYB.L
LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg 10+ Year US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF (LUTR.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.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.
| LUTR.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.25 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.62 | 5.64 | -5.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.49 | 16.08 | -14.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LUTR.L drawdown since its inception was -46.52%, which is greater than CNYB.L's maximum drawdown of -24.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LUTR.L and CNYB.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LUTR.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.52% | -24.43% | -22.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.99% | -1.30% | -5.69% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.14% | -3.73% | -12.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -40.30% | -11.92% | -28.38% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.52% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -37.87% | -5.07% | -32.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.90% | -13.91% | -6.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.92% | 0.46% | +2.46% |
Volatility
LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg 10+ Year US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF (LUTR.L) has a higher volatility of 2.36% compared to iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) at 1.27%. This indicates that LUTR.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNYB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LUTR.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.36% | 1.27% | +1.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.11% | 4.27% | +1.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.70% | 5.17% | +3.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.89% | 6.79% | +7.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.16% | 12.07% | +1.09% |
LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
LUTR.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
LUTR.L vs. CNYB.L - Dividend Comparison
LUTR.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.65%, more than CNYB.L's 1.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.72% | 1.89% | 2.24% | 2.55% | 2.72% | 2.74% | 2.65% | 0.72% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LUTR.L SPDR Bloomberg 10+ Year US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF | 4.65% | 4.40% | 4.22% | 3.13% | 2.56% | 1.72% | 1.91% | 2.42% | 2.49% | 2.61% | 1.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LUTR.L and CNYB.L have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LUTR.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LUTR.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNYB.L.
LUTR.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while CNYB.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. LUTR.L tracks Bloomberg US Treasury 10+ Year Index, while CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LUTR.L and 0.35% for CNYB.L.
Find the right allocation for LUTR.L and CNYB.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