PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

XCHA.L vs. RQFI.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XCHA.L (Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and RQFI.L (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D) are both China Equities funds from Xtrackers tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XCHA.L returned 9.32%/yr vs 5.64%/yr for RQFI.L. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XCHA.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for RQFI.L.

Performance

XCHA.L vs. RQFI.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 CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XCHA.L is traded in USD, while RQFI.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the RQFI.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 11.44% return, which is significantly higher than RQFI.L's 9.31% return. Over the past 10 years, XCHA.L has outperformed RQFI.L with an annualized return of 9.32%, while RQFI.L has yielded a comparatively lower 5.64% 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%

RQFI.L

1D
-0.69%
1M
2.40%
YTD
9.31%
6M
13.50%
1Y
37.28%
3Y*
12.34%
5Y*
-1.09%
10Y*
5.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCHA.L vs. RQFI.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%
RQFI.L
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D		9.31%27.41%13.28%-13.70%-26.48%-2.18%37.63%35.38%-28.18%32.41%

Correlation

The correlation between XCHA.L and RQFI.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

0.92

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

0.92

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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2014

0.90

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

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

Sectors
XCHA.L
RQFI.L

Technology

26.9%
26.3%

Financial Services

20.0%
20.4%

Industrials

16.5%
16.6%

Basic Materials

10.3%
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

7.2%
7.4%

Consumer Cyclical

6.5%
6.7%

Healthcare

4.7%
4.9%

Energy

3.0%
2.8%

Utilities

2.8%
3.0%

Communication Services

1.6%
0.8%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.5%

Technology

XCHA.L
26.9%
RQFI.L
26.3%

Financial Services

XCHA.L
20.0%
RQFI.L
20.4%

Industrials

XCHA.L
16.5%
RQFI.L
16.6%

Basic Materials

XCHA.L
10.3%
RQFI.L
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

XCHA.L
7.2%
RQFI.L
7.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XCHA.L
6.5%
RQFI.L
6.7%

Healthcare

XCHA.L
4.7%
RQFI.L
4.9%

Energy

XCHA.L
3.0%
RQFI.L
2.8%

Utilities

XCHA.L
2.8%
RQFI.L
3.0%

Communication Services

XCHA.L
1.6%
RQFI.L
0.8%

Real Estate

XCHA.L
0.5%
RQFI.L
0.5%

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 CSI 300 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 RQFI.L:
RQFI.L vs. CA3S.LRQFI.L vs. CHIN.LRQFI.L vs. XCX6.LRQFI.L vs. HMCT.LRQFI.L vs. CEBG.LRQFI.L vs. XCNA.LRQFI.L vs. CM5S.L

Return for Risk

XCHA.L vs. RQFI.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
RQFI.L
RQFI.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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. RQFI.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 CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.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.LRQFI.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.51
2.45

+0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.44
3.34

+0.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.42

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.69

5.76

+0.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.41

16.94

+2.47

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. RQFI.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is comparable to the RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCHA.L and RQFI.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.LRQFI.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.51

2.45

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.09

-0.05

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

0.26

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.29

0.28

+0.01

Drawdowns

XCHA.L vs. RQFI.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCHA.L drawdown since its inception was -50.88%, roughly equal to the maximum RQFI.L drawdown of -50.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCHA.L and RQFI.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XCHA.LRQFI.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.88%

-50.90%

+0.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.23%

-6.59%

+0.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.84%

-27.19%

+0.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.18%

-45.48%

+5.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.90%

-50.90%

+6.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.93%

-14.75%

+12.82%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.58%

-28.60%

+4.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.15%

2.22%

-0.07%

Volatility

XCHA.L vs. RQFI.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) has a higher volatility of 6.13% compared to Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) at 5.81%. This indicates that XCHA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RQFI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XCHA.LRQFI.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.13%

5.81%

+0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.46%

10.36%

+1.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.60%

15.54%

+1.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.39%

22.63%

-0.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.69%

23.40%

-0.71%

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

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

Dividends

XCHA.L vs. RQFI.L - Dividend Comparison

XCHA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RQFI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RQFI.L
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D		1.44%1.77%1.46%1.99%1.88%0.94%1.26%0.76%2.23%1.92%1.70%0.37%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%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 RQFI.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 RQFI.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for XCHA.L and 0.65% for RQFI.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCHA.L and RQFI.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