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

Performance

XCNA.L vs. XNGS.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 MSCI Next Generation Internet Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XNGS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XCNA.L is traded in USD, while XNGS.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the XNGS.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 lower than XNGS.L's 18.37% return.


XCNA.L

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

XNGS.L

1D
-0.69%
1M
14.48%
YTD
18.37%
6M
17.34%
1Y
34.95%
3Y*
31.11%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCNA.L vs. XNGS.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%-9.80%
XNGS.L
Xtrackers MSCI Next Generation Internet Innovation UCITS ETF 1C
18.37%20.06%35.79%56.70%-12.10%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNA.L and XNGS.L is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.34

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

0.30

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 21, 2022

0.34

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. XNGS.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

XNGS.L
XNGS.L Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
XNGS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XNGS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
XNGS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
XNGS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
XNGS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
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. XNGS.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 MSCI Next Generation Internet Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XNGS.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.LXNGS.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.69

1.95

+0.74

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.65

2.73

+0.92

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.33

+0.14

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

7.00

1.72

+5.28

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

20.72

4.76

+15.95

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

The current XCNA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is higher than the XNGS.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCNA.L and XNGS.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.LXNGS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.69

1.95

+0.74

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

1.35

-0.79

Drawdowns

XCNA.L vs. XNGS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNA.L drawdown since its inception was -32.05%, which is greater than XNGS.L's maximum drawdown of -24.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNA.L and XNGS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XCNA.LXNGS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.05%

-24.31%

-7.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.35%

-20.19%

+13.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.66%

-24.31%

-3.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.25%

-0.69%

-1.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.28%

-5.13%

-9.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.15%

7.32%

-5.17%

Volatility

XCNA.L vs. XNGS.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI China A ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCNA.L) has a higher volatility of 6.04% compared to Xtrackers MSCI Next Generation Internet Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XNGS.L) at 5.27%. This indicates that XCNA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XNGS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XCNA.LXNGS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.04%

5.27%

+0.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.33%

13.50%

-2.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.52%

17.88%

-1.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.46%

21.35%

+3.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.46%

21.35%

+3.11%

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

XCNA.L has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than XNGS.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

XCNA.L vs. XNGS.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XCNA.L and XNGS.L have a correlation of 0.34, 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 0.35% for XNGS.L.

XCNA.L is categorized as China Equities, while XNGS.L is Technology Equities. XCNA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while XNGS.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for XCNA.L and 0.35% for XNGS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCNA.L and XNGS.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