XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L
XCX6.L (Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C) and M9SV.L (Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds - XCX6.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while M9SV.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XCX6.L returned -4.51%/yr vs 4.90%/yr for M9SV.L. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XCX6.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for M9SV.L.
Performance
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
XCX6.L is traded in GBp, while M9SV.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the M9SV.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XCX6.L achieves a -7.52% return, which is significantly lower than M9SV.L's -1.93% return.
XCX6.L
- 1D
- -0.40%
- 1M
- -1.77%
- YTD
- -7.52%
- 6M
- -9.53%
- 1Y
- 5.17%
- 3Y*
- 7.33%
- 5Y*
- -4.51%
- 10Y*
- 5.39%
M9SV.L
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- -1.77%
- YTD
- -1.93%
- 6M
- -1.72%
- 1Y
- 7.63%
- 3Y*
- 6.60%
- 5Y*
- 4.90%
- 10Y*
- —
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XCX6.L Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C | -7.52% | 22.42% | 20.57% | -17.10% | -13.36% | -21.25% | 25.03% | 17.56% | -10.42% |
M9SV.L Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF | -1.93% | 0.90% | 30.31% | 0.87% | -6.40% | 7.53% | 22.73% | 5.67% | -5.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between XCX6.L and M9SV.L is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 7, 2018 | 0.53 |
The correlation between XCX6.L and M9SV.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Technology
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Industrials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Financial Services
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Communication Services
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Technology
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Basic Materials
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Healthcare
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Industrials
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Energy
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Consumer Defensive
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Utilities
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
Real Estate
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
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
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L — Risk / Return Rank
XCX6.L
M9SV.L
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C (XCX6.L) and Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.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.
| XCX6.L | M9SV.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.11 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.29 | 0.87 | -0.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.62 | 2.39 | -1.77 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XCX6.L | M9SV.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.28 | 0.62 | -0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.16 | 0.25 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | 0.30 | -0.16 |
Drawdowns
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XCX6.L drawdown since its inception was -57.08%, which is greater than M9SV.L's maximum drawdown of -21.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCX6.L and M9SV.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XCX6.L | M9SV.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -57.08% | -21.64% | -35.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.48% | -8.71% | -8.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.89% | -21.64% | -3.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -49.99% | -21.64% | -28.35% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.08% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.10% | -11.94% | -22.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.91% | -7.84% | -13.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.35% | 3.19% | +5.16% |
Volatility
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C (XCX6.L) has a higher volatility of 7.09% compared to Market Access STOXX China A Minimum Variance UCITS ETF (M9SV.L) at 2.56%. This indicates that XCX6.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than M9SV.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XCX6.L | M9SV.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.09% | 2.56% | +4.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.08% | 7.77% | +5.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.39% | 12.18% | +6.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.71% | 19.98% | +7.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.27% | 20.48% | +4.79% |
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XCX6.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than M9SV.L's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
XCX6.L vs. M9SV.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XCX6.L nor M9SV.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XCX6.L and M9SV.L have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, M9SV.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
M9SV.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XCX6.L.
XCX6.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while M9SV.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: DWS and China Post Global. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XCX6.L and 0.45% for M9SV.L.
Find the right allocation for XCX6.L and M9SV.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