PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PRIT.L vs. CBND.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi Prime US Treasury UCITS ETF DR (D) (PRIT.L) and Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

PRIT.L is traded in GBp, while CBND.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CBND.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PRIT.L achieves a 0.11% return, which is significantly lower than CBND.L's 4.44% return.


PRIT.L

1D
0.10%
1M
0.03%
6M
-0.02%
YTD
0.11%
1Y
3.39%
3Y*
2.17%
5Y*
0.04%
10Y*

CBND.L

1D
-0.99%
1M
-0.86%
6M
4.01%
YTD
4.44%
1Y
6.30%
3Y*
4.41%
5Y*
3.21%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
PRIT.L
Amundi Prime US Treasury UCITS ETF DR (D)
0.11%-1.06%2.58%-1.73%-1.78%-0.98%4.03%-1.30%
CBND.L
Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
4.44%-2.44%6.50%-3.78%6.10%8.62%5.51%0.03%

Correlation

The correlation between PRIT.L and CBND.L is 0.54, 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

0.54

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

0.50

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

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2019

0.51

The correlation between PRIT.L and CBND.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.54 - 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

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

PRIT.L
PRIT.L Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
PRIT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PRIT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
PRIT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
PRIT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
PRIT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

CBND.L
CBND.L Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
CBND.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CBND.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
CBND.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
CBND.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
CBND.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Prime US Treasury UCITS ETF DR (D) (PRIT.L) and Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L). 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.


PRIT.LCBND.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.18

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.69

1.84

-1.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.57

5.14

-3.57

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PRIT.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is lower than the CBND.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PRIT.L and CBND.L, 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

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PRIT.L drawdown since its inception was -24.81%, which is greater than CBND.L's maximum drawdown of -16.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRIT.L and CBND.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PRIT.LCBND.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.81%

-16.35%

-8.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.19%

-3.40%

-1.79%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.19%

-9.09%

+0.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.09%

-16.35%

+0.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.47%

-4.42%

-14.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.37%

-7.47%

-9.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.28%

1.22%

+1.06%

Volatility

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi Prime US Treasury UCITS ETF DR (D) (PRIT.L) and Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L) have volatilities of 1.86% and 1.90%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PRIT.LCBND.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.86%

1.90%

-0.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.47%

4.90%

-0.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.05%

6.39%

-0.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.67%

7.92%

+0.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.82%

8.34%

+4.48%

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

PRIT.L has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than CBND.L's 0.24% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

PRIT.L vs. CBND.L - Dividend Comparison

PRIT.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.22%, more than CBND.L's 2.04% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CBND.L
Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
2.04%2.20%2.45%2.54%2.72%2.52%1.87%0.00%
PRIT.L
Amundi Prime US Treasury UCITS ETF DR (D)
3.22%3.22%2.79%2.34%1.88%1.74%2.11%1.94%

Frequently Asked Questions


PRIT.L and CBND.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, PRIT.L is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

PRIT.L is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for CBND.L.

PRIT.L tracks Solactive US Treasury Bond Index, while CBND.L tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs China Government Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for PRIT.L and 0.24% for CBND.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PRIT.L and CBND.L

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