PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX

Last updated Jul 16, 2026
Documentation

MVW.AX (VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF) and CETF.AX (VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MVW.AX is a Global Equities fund tracking the VanEck Australian Equal Weight Index, while CETF.AX is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China A50 Net Tax AUD Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MVW.AX returned 7.25%/yr vs 5.29%/yr for CETF.AX. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a A$10,000 investment in VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF (MVW.AX) and VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF (CETF.AX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MVW.AX achieves a -0.08% return, which is significantly higher than CETF.AX's -0.98% return. Over the past 10 years, MVW.AX has outperformed CETF.AX with an annualized return of 7.25%, while CETF.AX has yielded a comparatively lower 5.29% annualized return.

MVW.AX

1D
-0.18%
1M
-1.38%
6M
0.31%
YTD
-0.08%
1Y
-0.49%
3Y*
5.54%
5Y*
5.17%
10Y*
7.25%

CETF.AX

1D
-1.86%
1M
-1.13%
6M
-2.24%
YTD
-0.98%
1Y
11.65%
3Y*
9.83%
5Y*
0.64%
10Y*
5.29%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MVW.AX
VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF		-0.08%5.96%7.39%9.60%-2.49%15.82%1.72%23.68%-5.79%15.45%
CETF.AX
VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF		-0.98%12.88%30.64%-13.18%-16.50%-1.23%18.52%33.28%-18.45%21.26%

Correlation

The correlation between MVW.AX and CETF.AX is 0.09, 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

0.09

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.01

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.08

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2015

0.12

The correlation between MVW.AX and CETF.AX shifts across timeframes, from 0.01 (3 years) to 0.12 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF

VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF

Return for Risk

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MVW.AX
MVW.AX Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
MVW.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MVW.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
MVW.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
MVW.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
MVW.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
CETF.AX
CETF.AX Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
CETF.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CETF.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
CETF.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
CETF.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
CETF.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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.

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF (MVW.AX) and VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF (CETF.AX). 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.

MVW.AXCETF.AXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.01
0.76

-0.75

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.11
1.11

-1.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.01

1.14

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.02

0.97

-0.95

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.03

2.38

-2.35

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MVW.AX Sharpe Ratio is 0.01, which is lower than the CETF.AX Sharpe Ratio of 0.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MVW.AX and CETF.AX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MVW.AX drawdown since its inception was -38.80%, smaller than the maximum CETF.AX drawdown of -41.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVW.AX and CETF.AX.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MVW.AXCETF.AXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.80%

-41.32%

+2.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.23%

-12.01%

+0.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.20%

-19.05%

+5.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.94%

-33.90%

+18.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.80%

-40.95%

+2.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.13%

-11.36%

+6.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.03%

-23.78%

+19.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.58%

4.95%

+0.63%

Volatility

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF (MVW.AX) is 2.96%, while VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF (CETF.AX) has a volatility of 5.19%. This indicates that MVW.AX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CETF.AX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MVW.AXCETF.AXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.96%

5.19%

-2.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.83%

11.75%

-1.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.47%

15.18%

-2.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.72%

19.75%

-5.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.99%

20.06%

-4.07%

Dividends

MVW.AX vs. CETF.AX - Dividend Comparison

MVW.AX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%, less than CETF.AX's 1.87% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CETF.AX
VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF		1.87%1.94%1.55%2.94%2.80%1.80%1.30%1.28%11.56%1.08%1.16%3.19%
MVW.AX
VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF		1.74%2.82%2.50%1.75%1.83%2.18%3.63%3.55%0.87%2.51%1.92%1.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

MVW.AX and CETF.AX have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MVW.AX is categorized as Global Equities, while CETF.AX is China Equities. MVW.AX tracks VanEck Australian Equal Weight Index, while CETF.AX tracks FTSE China A50 Net Tax AUD Index.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MVW.AX and CETF.AX

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