PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS
PPFB.DE (iShares Physical Gold ETC) and CYBU.AS (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - PPFB.DE is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold, while CYBU.AS is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PPFB.DE returned 28.05%/yr vs 4.26%/yr for CYBU.AS. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PPFB.DE charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CYBU.AS.
Performance
PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
PPFB.DE is traded in EUR, while CYBU.AS is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CYBU.AS values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PPFB.DE achieves a 2.74% return, which is significantly lower than CYBU.AS's 3.73% return.
PPFB.DE
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- -4.00%
- YTD
- 2.74%
- 6M
- 5.47%
- 1Y
- 31.35%
- 3Y*
- 28.05%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CYBU.AS
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 1.40%
- YTD
- 3.73%
- 6M
- 3.84%
- 1Y
- 3.26%
- 3Y*
- 4.26%
- 5Y*
- 6.70%
- 10Y*
- —
PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PPFB.DE iShares Physical Gold ETC | 2.74% | 49.11% | 34.17% | 9.42% | 7.03% | 2.86% |
CYBU.AS iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Dist) | 3.73% | -9.41% | 18.73% | 4.63% | 8.79% | 5.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between PPFB.DE and CYBU.AS 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2021 | 0.06 |
The correlation between PPFB.DE and CYBU.AS shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.06 (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.
Return for Risk
PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS — Risk / Return Rank
PPFB.DE
CYBU.AS
PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Gold ETC (PPFB.DE) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Dist) (CYBU.AS). 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.
| PPFB.DE | CYBU.AS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.82 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.09 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.81 | 0.75 | +1.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.60 | 1.75 | +2.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PPFB.DE drawdown since its inception was -16.60%, which is greater than CYBU.AS's maximum drawdown of -15.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PPFB.DE and CYBU.AS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PPFB.DE | CYBU.AS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.60% | -15.57% | -1.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.60% | -4.28% | -12.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.60% | -12.71% | -3.89% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -12.71% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.00% | -7.50% | -7.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.42% | -6.52% | +2.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.55% | 1.86% | +4.69% |
Volatility
PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS - Volatility Comparison
iShares Physical Gold ETC (PPFB.DE) has a higher volatility of 5.11% compared to iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Dist) (CYBU.AS) at 1.50%. This indicates that PPFB.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CYBU.AS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PPFB.DE | CYBU.AS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.11% | 1.50% | +3.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.18% | 4.75% | +15.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.12% | 6.78% | +16.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.13% | 8.05% | +8.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.13% | 7.94% | +8.19% |
PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS - Expense Ratio Comparison
PPFB.DE has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than CYBU.AS's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
PPFB.DE vs. CYBU.AS - Dividend Comparison
PPFB.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CYBU.AS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CYBU.AS iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Dist) | 0.89% | 1.88% | 2.13% | 2.45% | 2.60% | 2.82% | 2.66% | 0.21% |
PPFB.DE iShares Physical Gold ETC | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PPFB.DE and CYBU.AS 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.
On fees, PPFB.DE is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PPFB.DE is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for CYBU.AS.
PPFB.DE is categorized as Precious Metals, while CYBU.AS is Emerging Markets Bonds. PPFB.DE tracks Gold, while CYBU.AS tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for PPFB.DE and 0.40% for CYBU.AS.
Find the right allocation for PPFB.DE and CYBU.AS
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