XCX6.L vs. XX25.L
XCX6.L (Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C) and XX25.L (Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China NR USD, from DWS and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XCX6.L returned 4.13%/yr vs 4.67%/yr for XX25.L. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XCX6.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for XX25.L.
Performance
XCX6.L vs. XX25.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XCX6.L achieves a -14.41% return, which is significantly lower than XX25.L's 11.65% return. Over the past 10 years, XCX6.L has underperformed XX25.L with an annualized return of 4.13%, while XX25.L has yielded a comparatively higher 4.67% annualized return.
XCX6.L
- 1D
- -0.60%
- 1M
- -6.86%
- YTD
- -14.41%
- 6M
- -14.68%
- 1Y
- -3.87%
- 3Y*
- 5.07%
- 5Y*
- -6.42%
- 10Y*
- 4.13%
XX25.L
- 1D
- -2.24%
- 1M
- 1.90%
- YTD
- 11.65%
- 6M
- 12.56%
- 1Y
- 38.82%
- 3Y*
- 14.67%
- 5Y*
- 0.21%
- 10Y*
- 4.67%
XCX6.L vs. XX25.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XCX6.L Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C | -14.41% | 22.42% | 20.57% | -17.10% | -13.36% | -21.25% | 25.03% | 17.56% | -14.28% | 40.17% |
XX25.L Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C | 11.65% | 17.72% | 29.08% | -18.23% | -11.14% | -19.11% | 6.62% | 10.00% | -7.19% | 23.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between XCX6.L and XX25.L is 0.64, 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 | 0.64 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2010 | 0.92 |
Over the past year, the correlation between XCX6.L and XX25.L has dropped to 0.64 - well below their long-term average of 0.92, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
XCX6.L vs. XX25.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Technology
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Industrials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Financial Services
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Communication Services
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Technology
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Basic Materials
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Healthcare
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Industrials
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Energy
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Consumer Defensive
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Utilities
XCX6.L
XX25.L
Real Estate
XCX6.L
XX25.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. XX25.L — Risk / Return Rank
XCX6.L
XX25.L
XCX6.L vs. XX25.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 Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (XX25.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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| XCX6.L | XX25.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.53 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.41 | -0.43 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.17 | 5.36 | -5.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.40 | 14.89 | -15.29 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XCX6.L vs. XX25.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XCX6.L drawdown since its inception was -57.08%, smaller than the maximum XX25.L drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCX6.L and XX25.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XCX6.L | XX25.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -57.08% | -99.38% | +42.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.15% | -7.21% | -14.94% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.59% | -35.85% | +2.26% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -49.99% | -47.66% | -2.33% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.08% | -54.65% | -2.43% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -39.00% | -18.29% | -20.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.37% | -40.78% | +20.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.60% | 2.60% | +7.00% |
Volatility
XCX6.L vs. XX25.L - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers MSCI China UCITS ETF 1C (XCX6.L) and Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (XX25.L) have volatilities of 6.29% and 6.55%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XCX6.L | XX25.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.29% | 6.55% | -0.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.27% | 11.78% | +1.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.47% | 16.65% | +1.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.57% | 30.21% | +0.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.84% | 26.11% | +0.73% |
XCX6.L vs. XX25.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XCX6.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XX25.L's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
XCX6.L vs. XX25.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XCX6.L nor XX25.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XCX6.L and XX25.L have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XX25.L is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XX25.L is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XCX6.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: DWS and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XCX6.L and 0.60% for XX25.L.
Find the right allocation for XCX6.L and XX25.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