M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE
M9SV.DE (Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance Index UCITS ETF C EUR) and ICGA.DE (iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both China Equities funds - M9SV.DE tracks the STOXX China A 900 Minimum Variance Unconstrained AM Index while ICGA.DE tracks the MSCI China. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, M9SV.DE returned 4.62%/yr vs -4.52%/yr for ICGA.DE. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. M9SV.DE charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for ICGA.DE.
Performance
M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, M9SV.DE achieves a -4.17% return, which is significantly higher than ICGA.DE's -9.68% return.
M9SV.DE
- 1D
- -1.34%
- 1M
- -3.50%
- 6M
- -5.17%
- YTD
- -4.17%
- 1Y
- 0.85%
- 3Y*
- 7.46%
- 5Y*
- 4.62%
- 10Y*
- —
ICGA.DE
- 1D
- -2.46%
- 1M
- -0.63%
- 6M
- -13.45%
- YTD
- -9.68%
- 1Y
- -3.45%
- 3Y*
- 7.61%
- 5Y*
- -4.52%
- 10Y*
- —
M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M9SV.DE Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance Index UCITS ETF C EUR | -4.17% | -5.32% | 37.47% | 2.90% | -11.14% | 18.00% | 14.68% | -4.33% |
ICGA.DE iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF USD Acc | -9.68% | 16.59% | 27.32% | -14.87% | -15.07% | -17.34% | 15.34% | 14.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between M9SV.DE and ICGA.DE is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2019 | 0.46 |
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
M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE — Risk / Return Rank
M9SV.DE
ICGA.DE
M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance Index UCITS ETF C EUR (M9SV.DE) and iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF USD Acc (ICGA.DE). 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.
| M9SV.DE | ICGA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.25 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 0.99 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.12 | -0.17 | +0.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.26 | -0.34 | +0.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum M9SV.DE drawdown since its inception was -23.79%, smaller than the maximum ICGA.DE drawdown of -55.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for M9SV.DE and ICGA.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| M9SV.DE | ICGA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.79% | -55.91% | +32.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.28% | -20.80% | +13.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.79% | -24.29% | +0.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.79% | -46.23% | +22.44% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.53% | -34.62% | +17.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.53% | -28.86% | +19.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.23% | 10.15% | -6.92% |
Volatility
M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance Index UCITS ETF C EUR (M9SV.DE) is 3.57%, while iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF USD Acc (ICGA.DE) has a volatility of 6.00%. This indicates that M9SV.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICGA.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| M9SV.DE | ICGA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.57% | 6.00% | -2.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.43% | 13.96% | -6.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.11% | 19.38% | -8.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.42% | 27.74% | -7.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.48% | 26.97% | -5.49% |
M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
M9SV.DE has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than ICGA.DE's 0.28% expense ratio.
Dividends
M9SV.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither M9SV.DE nor ICGA.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
M9SV.DE and ICGA.DE have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ICGA.DE is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ICGA.DE is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for M9SV.DE.
M9SV.DE tracks STOXX China A 900 Minimum Variance Unconstrained AM Index, while ICGA.DE tracks MSCI China. They also come from different issuers: Market Access and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for M9SV.DE and 0.28% for ICGA.DE.
Find the right allocation for M9SV.DE and ICGA.DE
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