PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MSFW vs. CNYA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MSFW vs. CNYA

Last updated Jul 17, 2026
Documentation

MSFW (Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MSFW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Roundhill, while CNYA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. MSFW is actively managed, while CNYA is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. MSFW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.

Performance

MSFW vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF (MSFW) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSFW achieves a -21.45% return, which is significantly lower than CNYA's 3.25% return.

MSFW

1D
1.71%
1M
1.75%
6M
-15.87%
YTD
-21.45%
1Y
—
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

CNYA

1D
-2.70%
1M
-5.39%
6M
-0.46%
YTD
3.25%
1Y
24.03%
3Y*
9.14%
5Y*
-1.47%
10Y*
5.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MSFW vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025
MSFW
Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF		-21.45%-7.80%
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		3.25%15.81%

Correlation

The correlation between MSFW and CNYA is -0.05, 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 (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2025

-0.05

MSFW vs. CNYA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
MSFW
CNYA

Technology

32.7%
31.7%

Basic Materials

-

11.2%

Communication Services

-

1.3%

Consumer Cyclical

-

5.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.8%

Energy

-

3.1%

Financial Services

-

17.6%

Healthcare

-

3.9%

Industrials

-

15.4%

Real Estate

-

0.6%

Utilities

-

3.3%

Technology

MSFW
32.7%
CNYA
31.7%

Basic Materials

MSFW

-

CNYA
11.2%

Communication Services

MSFW

-

CNYA
1.3%

Consumer Cyclical

MSFW

-

CNYA
5.2%

Consumer Defensive

MSFW

-

CNYA
6.8%

Energy

MSFW

-

CNYA
3.1%

Financial Services

MSFW

-

CNYA
17.6%

Healthcare

MSFW

-

CNYA
3.9%

Industrials

MSFW

-

CNYA
15.4%

Real Estate

MSFW

-

CNYA
0.6%

Utilities

MSFW

-

CNYA
3.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF

iShares MSCI China A ETF

Often compared with MSFW:
MSFW vs. MSFOMSFW vs. MSFTMSFW vs. MSFXMSFW vs. MSFUMSFW vs. MSFYMSFW vs. GOOWMSFW vs. AMZW
Often compared with CNYA:
CNYA vs. MCHICNYA vs. ASHRCNYA vs. ICHN.ASCNYA vs. KBACNYA vs. FLCHCNYA vs. ICGA.DECNYA vs. GXC

Return for Risk

MSFW vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank

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

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

MSFW vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF (MSFW) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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.

MSFWCNYADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

—

1.22

—

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

—

1.75

—

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

—

1.22

—

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

—

3.05

—

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

—

8.01

—

MSFW vs. CNYA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MSFW vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSFW drawdown since its inception was -41.85%, smaller than the maximum CNYA drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFW and CNYA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MSFWCNYADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.85%

-49.49%

+7.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

—

-7.91%

—

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

—

-33.35%

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-44.65%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-49.49%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-32.08%

-18.21%

-13.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.41%

-20.61%

+1.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

—

3.01%

—

Volatility

MSFW vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MSFWCNYADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

—

8.85%

—

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

—

15.30%

—

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

33.58%

19.74%

+13.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

33.58%

24.07%

+9.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.58%

23.61%

+9.97%

MSFW vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSFW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSFW vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison

MSFW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 48.07%, more than CNYA's 1.82% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.82%1.92%2.51%4.23%2.69%1.11%1.06%1.21%3.92%0.97%1.38%
MSFW
Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF		48.07%20.25%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

MSFW and CNYA have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CNYA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CNYA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for MSFW.

MSFW has the higher dividend yield at 48.07%, compared with 1.82% for CNYA.

MSFW is categorized as Derivative Income, while CNYA is China Equities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for MSFW and 0.60% for CNYA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MSFW and CNYA

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