PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RQFI.L (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D) and ASIU.L (Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc) are both China Equities funds - RQFI.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY while ASIU.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RQFI.L returned -0.04%/yr vs -5.88%/yr for ASIU.L. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.65% expense ratio.

Performance

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) and Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RQFI.L achieves a 9.58% return, which is significantly higher than ASIU.L's -6.42% return.

RQFI.L

1D
-0.73%
1M
3.28%
YTD
9.58%
6M
12.66%
1Y
38.60%
3Y*
9.52%
5Y*
-0.04%
10Y*
6.41%

ASIU.L

1D
-0.43%
1M
-0.75%
YTD
-6.42%
6M
-8.99%
1Y
6.58%
3Y*
6.96%
5Y*
-5.88%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RQFI.L
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D		9.58%18.47%15.28%-18.09%-17.88%-1.05%33.54%29.68%-23.59%0.53%
ASIU.L
Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc		-6.42%27.24%20.02%-19.67%-18.26%-22.68%2.58%1.27%-5.56%-2.57%

Correlation

The correlation between RQFI.L and ASIU.L is 0.60, 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

0.60

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

0.41

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

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 19, 2017

0.35

Over the past year, RQFI.L and ASIU.L have become more correlated (0.60) than their long-term average of 0.35, meaning their price movements have been converging.

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
RQFI.L
ASIU.L

Technology

26.3%
11.7%

Financial Services

20.4%
19.0%

Industrials

16.6%
4.4%

Basic Materials

10.7%
3.1%

Consumer Defensive

7.4%
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

6.7%
29.8%

Healthcare

4.9%
5.9%

Utilities

3.0%
0.6%

Energy

2.8%
0.1%

Communication Services

0.8%
21.2%

Real Estate

0.5%
1.5%

Technology

RQFI.L
26.3%
ASIU.L
11.7%

Financial Services

RQFI.L
20.4%
ASIU.L
19.0%

Industrials

RQFI.L
16.6%
ASIU.L
4.4%

Basic Materials

RQFI.L
10.7%
ASIU.L
3.1%

Consumer Defensive

RQFI.L
7.4%
ASIU.L
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

RQFI.L
6.7%
ASIU.L
29.8%

Healthcare

RQFI.L
4.9%
ASIU.L
5.9%

Utilities

RQFI.L
3.0%
ASIU.L
0.6%

Energy

RQFI.L
2.8%
ASIU.L
0.1%

Communication Services

RQFI.L
0.8%
ASIU.L
21.2%

Real Estate

RQFI.L
0.5%
ASIU.L
1.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D

Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc

Often compared with RQFI.L:
RQFI.L vs. CA3S.LRQFI.L vs. CHIN.LRQFI.L vs. XCX6.LRQFI.L vs. HMCT.LRQFI.L vs. CEBG.LRQFI.L vs. XCNA.LRQFI.L vs. CM5S.L
Often compared with ASIU.L:
ASIU.L vs. BNKS.LASIU.L vs. LCCN.LASIU.L vs. GLDASIU.L vs. C500.LASIU.L vs. HMCA.LASIU.L vs. FLXC.LASIU.L vs. JRCD.L

Return for Risk

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RQFI.L
RQFI.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank
ASIU.L
ASIU.L Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
ASIU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) and Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.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.

RQFI.LASIU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.65
0.32

+2.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.51
0.60

+2.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.07

+0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.91

0.37

+6.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.89

0.73

+17.17

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is higher than the ASIU.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RQFI.L and ASIU.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

RQFI.LASIU.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.65

0.32

+2.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.00

-0.27

+0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.31

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

-0.25

+0.60

Drawdowns

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RQFI.L drawdown since its inception was -47.55%, smaller than the maximum ASIU.L drawdown of -59.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RQFI.L and ASIU.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RQFI.LASIU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.55%

-59.13%

+11.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.69%

-17.78%

+12.09%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.09%

-26.76%

+1.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.72%

-53.33%

+11.61%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.36%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.00%

-36.90%

+24.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.37%

-31.00%

+8.63%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.18%

9.05%

-6.87%

Volatility

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) is 5.18%, while Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L) has a volatility of 8.44%. This indicates that RQFI.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASIU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RQFI.LASIU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.18%

8.44%

-3.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.85%

15.08%

-5.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.88%

20.79%

-5.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.40%

38.58%

-17.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.60%

37.41%

-14.81%

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both RQFI.L and ASIU.L have an expense ratio of 0.65%.

Dividends

RQFI.L vs. ASIU.L - Dividend Comparison

RQFI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, while ASIU.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASIU.L
Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RQFI.L
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D		1.44%1.77%1.46%1.99%1.88%0.94%1.26%0.76%2.23%1.92%1.70%0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

RQFI.L and ASIU.L have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.65% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RQFI.L and ASIU.L have the same expense ratio: 0.65% per year.

RQFI.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while ASIU.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RQFI.L and ASIU.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