RVNU vs. ASHS
RVNU (Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF) and ASHS (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RVNU is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Solactive Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond Index, while ASHS is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RVNU returned 1.91%/yr vs 3.28%/yr for ASHS. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RVNU charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASHS.
Performance
RVNU vs. ASHS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RVNU achieves a 3.76% return, which is significantly lower than ASHS's 15.30% return. Over the past 10 years, RVNU has underperformed ASHS with an annualized return of 1.91%, while ASHS has yielded a comparatively higher 3.28% annualized return.
RVNU
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 1.22%
- YTD
- 3.76%
- 6M
- 3.09%
- 1Y
- 10.00%
- 3Y*
- 3.67%
- 5Y*
- -0.18%
- 10Y*
- 1.91%
ASHS
- 1D
- 0.78%
- 1M
- -1.03%
- YTD
- 15.30%
- 6M
- 23.86%
- 1Y
- 59.58%
- 3Y*
- 13.47%
- 5Y*
- 4.14%
- 10Y*
- 3.28%
RVNU vs. ASHS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RVNU Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF | 3.76% | 0.58% | 1.46% | 11.19% | -16.60% | 2.28% | 6.54% | 10.16% | -0.56% | 8.24% |
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 15.30% | 39.48% | 2.68% | -10.03% | -24.78% | 17.66% | 28.22% | 24.53% | -35.91% | 7.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between RVNU and ASHS is 0.10, 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 | 0.10 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2014 | 0.02 |
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
RVNU vs. ASHS — Risk / Return Rank
RVNU
ASHS
RVNU vs. ASHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF (RVNU) 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.
| RVNU | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.96 | 2.65 | -0.69 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.94 | 3.35 | -0.42 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.43 | -0.07 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.67 | 4.25 | -0.58 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.95 | 14.22 | -3.27 |
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
| RVNU | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.96 | 2.65 | -0.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.02 | 0.16 | -0.18 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.26 | 0.13 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 0.19 | +0.20 |
Drawdowns
RVNU vs. ASHS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RVNU drawdown since its inception was -23.51%, smaller than the maximum ASHS drawdown of -69.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RVNU and ASHS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RVNU | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.51% | -69.90% | +46.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.46% | -14.03% | +11.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.35% | -34.13% | +23.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.51% | -47.81% | +24.30% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.51% | -47.81% | +24.30% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.76% | -33.45% | +30.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.98% | -48.57% | +43.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.83% | 4.19% | -3.36% |
Volatility
RVNU vs. ASHS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF (RVNU) is 1.44%, while Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) has a volatility of 7.40%. This indicates that RVNU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RVNU | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.44% | 7.40% | -5.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.42% | 17.00% | -13.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.20% | 22.59% | -17.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.19% | 26.46% | -19.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.28% | 25.58% | -18.30% |
RVNU vs. ASHS - Expense Ratio Comparison
RVNU has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than ASHS's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
RVNU vs. ASHS - Dividend Comparison
RVNU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.51%, 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% |
RVNU Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF | 3.51% | 3.46% | 3.06% | 2.79% | 2.81% | 2.18% | 2.43% | 2.75% | 2.76% | 2.49% | 2.72% | 3.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RVNU and ASHS have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ASHS has higher volatility (7.40%) compared to RVNU (1.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RVNU dropped -23.51% vs ASHS's -69.90%.
On 10-year performance, ASHS leads with 3.28% vs 1.91% for RVNU. On fees, RVNU is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, RVNU has been the lower-risk option at 1.44%. 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 3.28% return vs 1.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RVNU is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHS.
RVNU has the higher dividend yield at 3.51%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.
RVNU is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while ASHS is China Equities. RVNU tracks Solactive Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond Index, while ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for RVNU and 0.65% for ASHS.
ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.96), 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 RVNU 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