PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XCHA.L vs. AH50.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XCHA.L (Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and AH50.L (Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D) are both China Equities funds from Xtrackers - XCHA.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY while AH50.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XCHA.L returned 9.32%/yr vs 7.74%/yr for AH50.L. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XCHA.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for AH50.L.

Performance

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) and Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCHA.L achieves a 11.44% return, which is significantly lower than AH50.L's 12.41% return. Over the past 10 years, XCHA.L has outperformed AH50.L with an annualized return of 9.32%, while AH50.L has yielded a comparatively lower 7.74% annualized return.

XCHA.L

1D
-0.57%
1M
2.27%
YTD
11.44%
6M
15.20%
1Y
41.84%
3Y*
15.51%
5Y*
2.07%
10Y*
9.32%

AH50.L

1D
-0.30%
1M
1.76%
YTD
12.41%
6M
17.72%
1Y
34.29%
3Y*
16.08%
5Y*
0.20%
10Y*
7.74%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		11.44%30.08%16.02%-11.00%-24.25%3.24%45.85%40.57%-24.28%35.23%
AH50.L
Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D		12.41%26.76%17.77%-13.04%-21.01%-6.02%28.04%34.30%-21.35%34.04%

Correlation

The correlation between XCHA.L and AH50.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

0.90

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

0.91

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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2016

0.89

The correlation between XCHA.L and AH50.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XCHA.L
AH50.L

Technology

26.9%
27.6%

Financial Services

20.0%
11.4%

Industrials

16.5%
20.4%

Basic Materials

10.3%
14.3%

Consumer Defensive

7.2%
5.3%

Consumer Cyclical

6.5%
7.5%

Healthcare

4.7%
6.1%

Energy

3.0%
2.6%

Utilities

2.8%
2.4%

Communication Services

1.6%
1.8%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.7%

Technology

XCHA.L
26.9%
AH50.L
27.6%

Financial Services

XCHA.L
20.0%
AH50.L
11.4%

Industrials

XCHA.L
16.5%
AH50.L
20.4%

Basic Materials

XCHA.L
10.3%
AH50.L
14.3%

Consumer Defensive

XCHA.L
7.2%
AH50.L
5.3%

Consumer Cyclical

XCHA.L
6.5%
AH50.L
7.5%

Healthcare

XCHA.L
4.7%
AH50.L
6.1%

Energy

XCHA.L
3.0%
AH50.L
2.6%

Utilities

XCHA.L
2.8%
AH50.L
2.4%

Communication Services

XCHA.L
1.6%
AH50.L
1.8%

Real Estate

XCHA.L
0.5%
AH50.L
0.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C

Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D

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
Often compared with AH50.L:
AH50.L vs. CA3S.LAH50.L vs. CM5S.LAH50.L vs. HMCT.LAH50.L vs. CHIN.LAH50.L vs. XCX6.LAH50.L vs. JRCE.LAH50.L vs. IASH.L

Return for Risk

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
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
AH50.L
AH50.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
AH50.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AH50.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
AH50.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
AH50.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
AH50.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) and Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.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.

XCHA.LAH50.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.51
1.89

+0.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.44
2.58

+0.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.34

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.69

4.11

+2.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.41

12.57

+6.84

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

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is higher than the AH50.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCHA.L and AH50.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

XCHA.LAH50.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.51

1.89

+0.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.09

0.01

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

0.33

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.29

0.33

-0.04

Drawdowns

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCHA.L drawdown since its inception was -50.88%, roughly equal to the maximum AH50.L drawdown of -50.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCHA.L and AH50.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XCHA.LAH50.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.88%

-50.58%

-0.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.23%

-8.30%

+2.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.84%

-25.95%

-0.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.18%

-45.27%

+5.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.90%

-50.58%

+5.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.93%

-8.78%

+6.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.58%

-21.40%

-3.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.15%

2.72%

-0.57%

Volatility

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) is 6.13%, while Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L) has a volatility of 6.50%. This indicates that XCHA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AH50.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XCHA.LAH50.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.13%

6.50%

-0.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.46%

13.07%

-1.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.60%

18.04%

-1.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.39%

24.33%

-1.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.69%

23.38%

-0.69%

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCHA.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than AH50.L's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCHA.L vs. AH50.L - Dividend Comparison

XCHA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AH50.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
AH50.L
Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D		2.08%2.79%2.37%2.72%3.00%1.78%1.57%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.92, XCHA.L and AH50.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 AH50.L.

XCHA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while AH50.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for XCHA.L and 0.65% for AH50.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCHA.L and AH50.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