XCHA.L vs. CNAL.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

XCHA.L (Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and CNAL.L (Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, from Xtrackers and Amundi respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XCHA.L returned 10.03%/yr vs 5.72%/yr for CNAL.L. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XCHA.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNAL.L.

Performance

XCHA.L vs. CNAL.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 Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

XCHA.L is traded in USD, while CNAL.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CNAL.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCHA.L achieves a 14.22% return, which is significantly higher than CNAL.L's 11.69% return. Over the past 10 years, XCHA.L has outperformed CNAL.L with an annualized return of 10.03%, while CNAL.L has yielded a comparatively lower 5.72% annualized return.

XCHA.L

• 1D: 2.00%
• 1M: 2.80%
• YTD: 14.22%
• 6M: 14.51%
• 1Y: 41.57%
• 3Y*: 17.46%
• 5Y*: 2.96%
• 10Y*: 10.03%

CNAL.L

• 1D: 1.73%
• 1M: 1.51%
• YTD: 11.69%
• 6M: 12.20%
• 1Y: 35.67%
• 3Y*: 13.42%
• 5Y*: -0.21%
• 10Y*: 5.72%

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XCHA.L Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C	14.22%	30.11%	16.00%	-11.00%	-24.25%	3.24%	45.85%	40.57%	-24.26%	35.21%
CNAL.L Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR	11.69%	26.41%	10.88%	-14.62%	-26.00%	3.57%	42.19%	37.89%	-30.55%	21.76%

Correlation

The correlation between XCHA.L and CNAL.L is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2014	0.92

The correlation between XCHA.L and CNAL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	XCHA.L	CNAL.L
Technology	31.6%	33.2%
Financial Services	18.8%	17.9%
Industrials	16.0%	14.8%
Basic Materials	9.1%	11.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.6%	6.2%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	4.8%
Healthcare	4.3%	3.7%
Utilities	2.9%	3.2%
Energy	2.7%	3.0%
Communication Services	1.5%	1.2%
Real Estate	0.4%	0.5%

Return for Risk

XCHA.L vs. CNAL.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: 87
XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
XCHA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
XCHA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 82
XCHA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
XCHA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 90

CNAL.L

CNAL.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
CNAL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CNAL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CNAL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 82
CNAL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CNAL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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. CNAL.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 Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.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.

	XCHA.L	CNAL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.37	2.07	+0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	2.85	+0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.36	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.63	4.76	+1.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.93	13.11	+4.82

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

The current XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is comparable to the CNAL.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCHA.L and CNAL.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.

Drawdowns

XCHA.L vs. CNAL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCHA.L drawdown since its inception was -50.90%, smaller than the maximum CNAL.L drawdown of -56.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCHA.L and CNAL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCHA.L	CNAL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.90%	-56.20%	+5.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.24%	-7.47%	+1.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.85%	-28.64%	+1.79%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.75%	-44.89%	+5.14%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.89%	-49.84%	+4.95%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-11.96%	+10.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.08%	-33.85%	+9.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.31%	2.71%	-0.40%

Volatility

XCHA.L vs. CNAL.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) has a higher volatility of 6.99% compared to Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) at 6.62%. This indicates that XCHA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNAL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCHA.L	CNAL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.99%	6.62%	+0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.81%	12.57%	+0.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.53%	17.20%	+0.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.49%	23.02%	-0.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.72%	22.78%	-0.06%

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

XCHA.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CNAL.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCHA.L vs. CNAL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XCHA.L nor CNAL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XCHA.L and CNAL.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, XCHA.L and CNAL.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.

Which ETF is better, XCHA.L or CNAL.L?

On fees, CNAL.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCHA.L or CNAL.L?

CNAL.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for XCHA.L.

What is the main difference between XCHA.L and CNAL.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for XCHA.L and 0.35% for CNAL.L.