SBIL vs. ASHR

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

SBIL (Simplify Government Money Market ETF) and ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SBIL is a Money Market fund actively managed by Simplify, while ASHR is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 300 Index. SBIL is actively managed, while ASHR is passively managed. Over the past year, SBIL returned 3.85% vs 23.78% for ASHR. Their -0.09 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. SBIL charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASHR.

Performance

SBIL vs. ASHR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify Government Money Market ETF (SBIL) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SBIL achieves a 2.09% return, which is significantly lower than ASHR's 4.11% return.

SBIL

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.31%
• 6M: 1.75%
• YTD: 2.09%
• 1Y: 3.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.84%

ASHR

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -2.73%
• 6M: 2.27%
• YTD: 4.11%
• 1Y: 23.78%
• 3Y*: 8.75%
• 5Y*: -0.35%
• 10Y*: 4.89%
• ALL TIME*: 5.78%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF	$123.30M	$155.65M	$161.34M
SBIL Simplify Government Money Market ETF	$31.14M	$24.02M	$26.67M

SBIL vs. ASHR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SBIL Simplify Government Money Market ETF	2.09%	1.88%
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF	4.11%	18.98%

Correlation

The correlation between SBIL and ASHR is -0.09, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025	-0.09

Return for Risk

SBIL vs. ASHR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

SBIL

SBIL Risk / Return Rank: 100
SBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
SBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
SBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100
SBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
SBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

ASHR

ASHR Risk / Return Rank: 54
ASHR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
ASHR Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
ASHR Omega Ratio Rank: 47
ASHR Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
ASHR Martin Ratio Rank: 59

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

SBIL vs. ASHR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Government Money Market ETF (SBIL) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR). 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.

	SBIL	ASHR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	15.08	1.18	+13.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	58.38	1.73	+56.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	12.98	1.21	+11.76
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	154.53	2.38	+152.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	868.15	6.99	+861.16

SBIL vs. ASHR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SBIL Sharpe Ratio is 15.08, which is higher than the ASHR Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SBIL and ASHR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

SBIL vs. ASHR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SBIL drawdown since its inception was -0.03%, smaller than the maximum ASHR drawdown of -51.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SBIL and ASHR.

Drawdown Indicators

	SBIL	ASHR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.03%	-51.30%	+51.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.02%	-9.84%	+9.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-33.12%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-44.10%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-51.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-20.23%	+20.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	0.00%	-29.03%	+29.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.00%	3.34%	-3.34%

Volatility

SBIL vs. ASHR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Simplify Government Money Market ETF (SBIL) is 0.05%, while Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) has a volatility of 8.68%. This indicates that SBIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASHR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SBIL	ASHR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.05%	8.68%	-8.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.18%	15.50%	-15.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26%	19.86%	-19.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.26%	23.98%	-23.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.26%	24.20%	-23.94%

SBIL vs. ASHR - Expense Ratio Comparison

SBIL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than ASHR's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

SBIL vs. ASHR - Dividend Comparison

SBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.87%, more than ASHR's 2.22% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF	2.22%	2.31%	1.13%	2.48%	1.13%	0.88%	0.81%	0.98%	1.32%	0.84%	0.73%	30.13%
SBIL Simplify Government Money Market ETF	3.87%	1.79%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SBIL and ASHR in my portfolio?

SBIL and ASHR 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.

Which is riskier, SBIL or ASHR?

ASHR has higher volatility (8.68%) compared to SBIL (0.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SBIL dropped -0.03% vs ASHR's -51.30%.

Which ETF is better, SBIL or ASHR?

On 1-year performance, ASHR leads with 23.78% vs 3.85% for SBIL. On fees, SBIL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, SBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SBIL or ASHR?

Over the 1-year period, ASHR has performed better with a 23.78% return vs 3.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SBIL or ASHR?

SBIL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SBIL or ASHR?

SBIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.87%, compared with 2.22% for ASHR.

What is the main difference between SBIL and ASHR?

SBIL is categorized as Money Market, while ASHR is China Equities. They also come from different issuers: Simplify and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SBIL and 0.65% for ASHR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (15.08 vs 1.18), 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.