PGJ vs. ASHS
PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and ASHS (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF) are both China Equities funds - PGJ tracks the Halter USX China Index while ASHS tracks the CSI 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PGJ returned 0.39%/yr vs 3.27%/yr for ASHS. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASHS.
Performance
PGJ vs. ASHS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -10.99% return, which is significantly lower than ASHS's 15.10% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has underperformed ASHS with an annualized return of 0.39%, while ASHS has yielded a comparatively higher 3.27% annualized return.
PGJ
- 1D
- -2.45%
- 1M
- -3.45%
- YTD
- -10.99%
- 6M
- -12.93%
- 1Y
- -4.61%
- 3Y*
- 3.00%
- 5Y*
- -13.64%
- 10Y*
- 0.39%
ASHS
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- -0.19%
- YTD
- 15.10%
- 6M
- 23.90%
- 1Y
- 57.65%
- 3Y*
- 13.41%
- 5Y*
- 3.97%
- 10Y*
- 3.27%
PGJ vs. ASHS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | -10.99% | 13.66% | 5.91% | -2.38% | -24.50% | -42.87% | 54.24% | 32.18% | -29.51% | 60.27% |
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 15.10% | 39.48% | 2.68% | -10.03% | -24.78% | 17.66% | 28.22% | 24.53% | -35.91% | 7.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between PGJ and ASHS is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2014 | 0.50 |
The correlation between PGJ and ASHS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.
PGJ vs. ASHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PGJ
ASHS
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
Financial Services
Real Estate
Energy
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
PGJ
ASHS
Technology
PGJ
ASHS
Communication Services
PGJ
ASHS
Consumer Defensive
PGJ
ASHS
Industrials
PGJ
ASHS
Financial Services
PGJ
ASHS
Real Estate
PGJ
ASHS
Energy
PGJ
ASHS
Healthcare
PGJ
ASHS
Basic Materials
PGJ
-
ASHS
Utilities
PGJ
-
ASHS
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
PGJ vs. ASHS — Risk / Return Rank
PGJ
ASHS
PGJ vs. ASHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). 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.
| PGJ | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.76 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 1.42 | -0.43 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 4.13 | -4.31 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.34 | 13.72 | -14.07 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PGJ | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.19 | 2.57 | -2.76 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.31 | 0.15 | -0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.01 | 0.13 | -0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.12 | 0.19 | -0.07 |
Drawdowns
PGJ vs. ASHS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than ASHS's maximum drawdown of -69.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and ASHS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PGJ | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.37% | -69.90% | -8.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.69% | -14.03% | -11.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.82% | -34.13% | +3.31% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -70.00% | -47.81% | -22.19% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.37% | -47.81% | -30.56% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -66.07% | -33.57% | -32.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.74% | -48.57% | +16.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.40% | 4.21% | +9.19% |
Volatility
PGJ vs. ASHS - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) has a higher volatility of 8.55% compared to Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) at 7.33%. This indicates that PGJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PGJ | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.55% | 7.33% | +1.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.28% | 17.00% | +0.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.46% | 22.59% | +1.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.73% | 26.46% | +17.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.70% | 25.57% | +11.13% |
PGJ vs. ASHS - Expense Ratio Comparison
PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than ASHS's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
PGJ vs. ASHS - Dividend Comparison
PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.56%, while ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.69% | 0.65% | 1.90% | 0.76% | 0.43% | 0.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 8.34% |
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 3.56% | 3.38% | 4.70% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PGJ and ASHS have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PGJ has higher volatility (8.55%) compared to ASHS (7.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs ASHS's -69.90%.
On 10-year performance, ASHS leads with 3.27% vs 0.39% for PGJ. On fees, ASHS is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASHS has been the lower-risk option at 7.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ASHS has performed better with a 3.27% return vs 0.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ASHS is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for PGJ.
PGJ has the higher dividend yield at 3.56%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.
PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index, while ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.65% for ASHS.
ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs -0.19), 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 PGJ and ASHS
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