PCCE vs. ISVBF
PCCE (Polen Capital China Growth ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds. PCCE is actively managed, while ISVBF is passively managed. Over the past year, PCCE returned -0.44% vs -1.31% for ISVBF. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PCCE charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
PCCE vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PCCE achieves a -6.04% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -10.73% return.
PCCE
- 1D
- -1.24%
- 1M
- -1.64%
- 6M
- -9.96%
- YTD
- -6.04%
- 1Y
- -0.44%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ISVBF
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- -2.30%
- 6M
- -13.22%
- YTD
- -10.73%
- 1Y
- -1.31%
- 3Y*
- 9.11%
- 5Y*
- -5.76%
- 10Y*
- —
PCCE vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
PCCE Polen Capital China Growth ETF | -6.04% | 23.07% | 10.79% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -10.73% | 30.64% | 19.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between PCCE and ISVBF is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.63 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2024 | 0.55 |
The correlation between PCCE and ISVBF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
PCCE vs. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank
PCCE
ISVBF
PCCE vs. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital China Growth ETF (PCCE) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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.
| PCCE | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.02 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.02 | -0.03 | 0.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.04 | -0.06 | +0.02 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PCCE vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCCE drawdown since its inception was -26.38%, smaller than the maximum ISVBF drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCCE and ISVBF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCCE | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.38% | -53.78% | +27.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.59% | -24.14% | +7.55% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -24.14% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -52.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.25% | -27.65% | +13.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.08% | -32.65% | +22.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.43% | 10.30% | -1.87% |
Volatility
PCCE vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Polen Capital China Growth ETF (PCCE) is 5.96%, while iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a volatility of 7.91%. This indicates that PCCE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PCCE | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.96% | 7.91% | -1.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.06% | 27.09% | -12.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.51% | 31.36% | -11.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.01% | 30.42% | -4.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.01% | 30.14% | -4.13% |
PCCE vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
PCCE has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
PCCE vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison
PCCE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.43%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PCCE Polen Capital China Growth ETF | 2.43% | 2.29% | 1.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PCCE and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ISVBF has higher volatility (7.91%) compared to PCCE (5.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCCE dropped -26.38% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.
On 1-year performance, PCCE leads with -0.44% vs -1.31% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, PCCE has been the lower-risk option at 5.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PCCE has performed better with a -0.44% return vs -1.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for PCCE.
PCCE has the higher dividend yield at 2.43%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
They also come from different issuers: Polen and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for PCCE and 0.40% for ISVBF.
PCCE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.02 vs -0.02), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for PCCE and ISVBF
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