PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
UB82.L vs. CNYB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg US 7-10 Year Treasury Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB82.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

UB82.L is traded in GBp, while CNYB.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the CNYB.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UB82.L achieves a 0.13% return, which is significantly lower than CNYB.L's 5.09% return.


UB82.L

1D
0.37%
1M
-0.35%
6M
-0.09%
YTD
0.13%
1Y
2.84%
3Y*
1.57%
5Y*
-0.98%
10Y*
0.26%

CNYB.L

1D
0.24%
1M
-0.35%
6M
4.32%
YTD
5.09%
1Y
7.12%
3Y*
4.85%
5Y*
3.58%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
UB82.L
UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg US 7-10 Year Treasury Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis
0.13%-0.40%1.34%-2.28%-4.86%-1.84%5.95%-3.97%
CNYB.L
iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
5.09%-2.20%6.65%-4.09%6.21%9.69%-19.80%0.53%

Correlation

The correlation between UB82.L and CNYB.L is 0.80, 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

0.80

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

0.58

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

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019

0.49

Over the past year, UB82.L and CNYB.L have become more correlated (0.80) than their long-term average of 0.49, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

UB82.L
UB82.L Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
UB82.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UB82.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
UB82.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
UB82.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
UB82.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

CNYB.L
CNYB.L Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
CNYB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
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.

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg US 7-10 Year Treasury Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB82.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.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.


UB82.LCNYB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.65

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.21

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.58

2.58

-1.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.39

6.11

-4.73

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UB82.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.48, which is lower than the CNYB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UB82.L and CNYB.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

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UB82.L drawdown since its inception was -44.55%, which is greater than CNYB.L's maximum drawdown of -25.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UB82.L and CNYB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UB82.LCNYB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.55%

-25.82%

-18.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.86%

-2.75%

-2.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.79%

-9.03%

+1.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.40%

-15.44%

-0.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.93%

-7.24%

-15.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-23.84%

-12.52%

-11.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.04%

1.16%

+0.88%

Volatility

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L - Volatility Comparison

UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg US 7-10 Year Treasury Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB82.L) has a higher volatility of 1.32% compared to iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) at 1.24%. This indicates that UB82.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNYB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UB82.LCNYB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.32%

1.24%

+0.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.37%

4.69%

-0.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.93%

6.29%

-0.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.39%

7.65%

+1.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.87%

11.47%

-1.60%

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

UB82.L has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

UB82.L vs. CNYB.L - Dividend Comparison

UB82.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.09%, more than CNYB.L's 1.72% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNYB.L
iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
1.72%1.89%2.24%2.55%2.72%2.74%2.65%0.72%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
UB82.L
UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg US 7-10 Year Treasury Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis
3.09%2.20%2.49%2.80%1.34%1.02%1.82%1.98%2.70%1.92%0.84%0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions


UB82.L and CNYB.L have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, UB82.L is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

UB82.L is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNYB.L.

UB82.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while CNYB.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. UB82.L tracks Bloomberg US 7-10 Year Treasury Bond Index, while CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for UB82.L and 0.35% for CNYB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UB82.L and CNYB.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