PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

RQFI.L vs. XCHA.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RQFI.L (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D) and XCHA.L (Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds from Xtrackers tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RQFI.L returned 6.41%/yr vs 10.13%/yr for XCHA.L. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RQFI.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for XCHA.L.

Performance

RQFI.L vs. XCHA.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 Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

RQFI.L is traded in GBp, while XCHA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XCHA.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 lower than XCHA.L's 11.89% return. Over the past 10 years, RQFI.L has underperformed XCHA.L with an annualized return of 6.41%, while XCHA.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.13% annualized 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%

XCHA.L

1D
-0.57%
1M
3.21%
YTD
11.89%
6M
14.40%
1Y
43.22%
3Y*
12.61%
5Y*
3.17%
10Y*
10.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RQFI.L vs. XCHA.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%20.20%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		11.89%20.82%18.05%-15.45%-15.25%4.22%41.57%35.22%-19.79%23.54%

Correlation

The correlation between RQFI.L and XCHA.L is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.92

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

0.92

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

0.92

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2014

0.89

The correlation between RQFI.L and XCHA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
RQFI.L
XCHA.L

Technology

26.3%
26.9%

Financial Services

20.4%
20.0%

Industrials

16.6%
16.5%

Basic Materials

10.7%
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

7.4%
7.2%

Consumer Cyclical

6.7%
6.5%

Healthcare

4.9%
4.7%

Utilities

3.0%
2.8%

Energy

2.8%
3.0%

Communication Services

0.8%
1.6%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.5%

Technology

RQFI.L
26.3%
XCHA.L
26.9%

Financial Services

RQFI.L
20.4%
XCHA.L
20.0%

Industrials

RQFI.L
16.6%
XCHA.L
16.5%

Basic Materials

RQFI.L
10.7%
XCHA.L
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

RQFI.L
7.4%
XCHA.L
7.2%

Consumer Cyclical

RQFI.L
6.7%
XCHA.L
6.5%

Healthcare

RQFI.L
4.9%
XCHA.L
4.7%

Utilities

RQFI.L
3.0%
XCHA.L
2.8%

Energy

RQFI.L
2.8%
XCHA.L
3.0%

Communication Services

RQFI.L
0.8%
XCHA.L
1.6%

Real Estate

RQFI.L
0.5%
XCHA.L
0.5%

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

Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C

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 XCHA.L:
XCHA.L vs. ASHRXCHA.L vs. CSPX.LXCHA.L vs. VUAA.DEXCHA.L vs. HMCT.LXCHA.L vs. CA3S.LXCHA.L vs. XCNA.LXCHA.L vs. CEBG.L

Return for Risk

RQFI.L vs. XCHA.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
XCHA.L
XCHA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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. XCHA.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 Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.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.LXCHA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.65
2.62

+0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.51
3.44

+0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.47

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.91

6.92

-0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.89

19.40

-1.51

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. XCHA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is comparable to the XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RQFI.L and XCHA.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.LXCHA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.65

2.62

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.00

0.15

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.31

0.45

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

0.34

+0.02

Drawdowns

RQFI.L vs. XCHA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RQFI.L drawdown since its inception was -47.55%, roughly equal to the maximum XCHA.L drawdown of -47.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RQFI.L and XCHA.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RQFI.LXCHA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.55%

-47.42%

-0.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.69%

-6.22%

+0.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.09%

-24.78%

-0.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.72%

-36.96%

-4.76%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.36%

-39.52%

-6.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.00%

-1.17%

-10.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.37%

-18.80%

-3.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.18%

2.22%

-0.04%

Volatility

RQFI.L vs. XCHA.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) is 5.18%, while Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) has a volatility of 5.66%. This indicates that RQFI.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCHA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RQFI.LXCHA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.18%

5.66%

-0.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.85%

11.49%

-1.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.88%

16.44%

-1.56%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.40%

21.49%

-0.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.60%

22.57%

+0.03%

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

RQFI.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XCHA.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

RQFI.L vs. XCHA.L - Dividend Comparison

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

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.92, RQFI.L and XCHA.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, XCHA.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XCHA.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for RQFI.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for RQFI.L and 0.50% for XCHA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RQFI.L and XCHA.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