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

Performance

XCNA.L vs. RQFI.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 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

XCNA.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, XCNA.L achieves a 10.97% return, which is significantly higher than RQFI.L's 9.31% return.


XCNA.L

1D
-0.86%
1M
1.01%
YTD
10.97%
6M
15.66%
1Y
42.13%
3Y*
15.32%
5Y*
10Y*

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)

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


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
XCNA.L
Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C
10.97%32.54%14.47%-12.47%11.73%
RQFI.L
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D
9.31%27.41%13.28%-13.70%-11.32%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNA.L and RQFI.L is 0.93, 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

0.93

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

0.91

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

0.90

The correlation between XCNA.L and RQFI.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - 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. RQFI.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: 8383
Overall Rank
XCNA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCNA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCNA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XCNA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCNA.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.

XCNA.L vs. RQFI.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 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.


XCNA.LRQFI.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.42

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.61

5.76

+0.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.46

16.94

+2.52

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

The current XCNA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is comparable to the RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCNA.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


XCNA.LRQFI.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.54

2.45

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

0.28

+0.27

Drawdowns

XCNA.L vs. RQFI.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNA.L drawdown since its inception was -32.05%, smaller than the maximum RQFI.L drawdown of -50.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNA.L and RQFI.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XCNA.LRQFI.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.05%

-50.90%

+18.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.35%

-6.59%

+0.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.66%

-27.19%

-0.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-50.90%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.09%

-14.75%

+11.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.27%

-28.60%

+14.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.16%

2.22%

-0.06%

Volatility

XCNA.L vs. RQFI.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCNA.L) has a higher volatility of 6.12% compared to Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) at 5.81%. This indicates that XCNA.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


XCNA.LRQFI.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.12%

5.81%

+0.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.35%

10.36%

+0.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.53%

15.54%

+0.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.45%

22.63%

+1.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.45%

23.40%

+1.05%

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

XCNA.L has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than RQFI.L's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

XCNA.L vs. RQFI.L - Dividend Comparison

XCNA.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%
XCNA.L
Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened 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 0.93, XCNA.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, 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 0.65% for RQFI.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: DWS and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for XCNA.L and 0.65% for RQFI.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCNA.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