M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.L).

M9SV.L and CM5S.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. M9SV.L is a passively managed fund by China Post Global that tracks the performance of the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. It was launched on Jun 7, 2018. CM5S.L is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. It was launched on May 5, 2022. Both M9SV.L and CM5S.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
M9SV.L Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF	-2.53%	0.90%	30.31%	0.87%	4.72%
CM5S.L Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc	6.85%	42.07%	14.29%	-14.04%	13.69%

Different Trading Currencies

M9SV.L is traded in GBP, while CM5S.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CM5S.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, M9SV.L achieves a -2.53% return, which is significantly lower than CM5S.L's 6.85% return.

M9SV.L

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: -0.27%
• YTD: -2.53%
• 6M: 0.32%
• 1Y: 4.80%
• 3Y*: 7.42%
• 5Y*: 4.45%
• 10Y*: —

CM5S.L

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: -7.61%
• YTD: 6.85%
• 6M: 12.92%
• 1Y: 45.78%
• 3Y*: 12.43%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

M9SV.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than CM5S.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

M9SV.L

Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF

CM5S.L

Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc

Return for Risk

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

M9SV.L

M9SV.L Risk / Return Rank: 21
M9SV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
M9SV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
M9SV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 18
M9SV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
M9SV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 22

CM5S.L

CM5S.L Risk / Return Rank: 90
CM5S.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
CM5S.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
CM5S.L Omega Ratio Rank: 87
CM5S.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
CM5S.L Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.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.

	M9SV.L	CM5S.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.35	2.11	-1.76
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.58	2.61	-2.03
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.37	-0.30
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.62	3.56	-2.94
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.82	13.50	-11.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current M9SV.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.35, which is lower than the CM5S.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of M9SV.L and CM5S.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	M9SV.L	CM5S.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35	2.11	-1.76
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.57	-0.27

Correlation

The correlation between M9SV.L and CM5S.L is 0.47, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither M9SV.L nor CM5S.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum M9SV.L drawdown since its inception was -21.64%, smaller than the maximum CM5S.L drawdown of -38.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for M9SV.L and CM5S.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	M9SV.L	CM5S.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.64%	-38.57%	+16.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.71%	-12.93%	+4.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.64%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.48%	-8.36%	-4.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.77%	-13.90%	+6.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.98%	3.41%	-0.43%

Volatility

M9SV.L vs. CM5S.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L) is 4.33%, while Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.L) has a volatility of 6.99%. This indicates that M9SV.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CM5S.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	M9SV.L	CM5S.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.33%	6.99%	-2.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.91%	15.68%	-6.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.55%	21.57%	-8.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.07%	25.18%	-5.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.67%	25.18%	-4.51%