PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCNA.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCNA.L achieves a 11.94% return, which is significantly higher than CNSG.L's -2.93% return.


XCNA.L

1D
-0.09%
1M
1.98%
YTD
11.94%
6M
16.87%
1Y
44.67%
3Y*
14.96%
5Y*
10Y*

CNSG.L

1D
2.89%
1M
0.37%
YTD
-2.93%
6M
-3.11%
1Y
6.40%
3Y*
8.23%
5Y*
-6.06%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
XCNA.L
Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C
11.94%32.54%14.47%-12.47%11.73%
CNSG.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis
-2.93%23.70%17.27%-15.55%-9.17%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNA.L and CNSG.L is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.70

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

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2022

0.74

The correlation between XCNA.L and CNSG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCNA.L
XCNA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
XCNA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCNA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCNA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
XCNA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCNA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

CNSG.L
CNSG.L Risk / Return Rank: 1616
Overall Rank
CNSG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNSG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNSG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
CNSG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNSG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
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.

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCNA.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.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.


XCNA.LCNSG.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.69

0.44

+2.26

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.65

0.72

+2.93

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.09

+0.39

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

7.00

0.52

+6.48

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

20.72

1.17

+19.55

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCNA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is higher than the CNSG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCNA.L and CNSG.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


XCNA.LCNSG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.69

0.44

+2.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.04

+0.52

Drawdowns

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNA.L drawdown since its inception was -32.05%, smaller than the maximum CNSG.L drawdown of -61.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNA.L and CNSG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XCNA.LCNSG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.05%

-61.28%

+29.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.35%

-14.95%

+8.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.66%

-28.94%

+1.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.25%

-36.92%

+34.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.28%

-33.30%

+19.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.15%

6.65%

-4.50%

Volatility

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCNA.L) is 6.04%, while UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.L) has a volatility of 6.46%. This indicates that XCNA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNSG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XCNA.LCNSG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.04%

6.46%

-0.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.33%

12.48%

-1.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.52%

17.72%

-1.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.46%

28.73%

-4.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.46%

27.40%

-2.94%

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCNA.L has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than CNSG.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

XCNA.L vs. CNSG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XCNA.L nor CNSG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XCNA.L and CNSG.L have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XCNA.L is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XCNA.L is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CNSG.L.

XCNA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while CNSG.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: DWS and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for XCNA.L and 0.45% for CNSG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCNA.L and CNSG.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