XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

XNIF.L (Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and CI2G.L (Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD) are both India Equities funds tracking the MSCI India NR USD, from Xtrackers and Amundi respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XNIF.L returned 6.17%/yr vs 6.61%/yr for CI2G.L. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XNIF.L charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for CI2G.L.

Performance

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XNIF.L) and Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XNIF.L achieves a -13.58% return, which is significantly lower than CI2G.L's -10.36% return. Over the past 10 years, XNIF.L has underperformed CI2G.L with an annualized return of 6.17%, while CI2G.L has yielded a comparatively higher 6.61% annualized return.

XNIF.L

• 1D: 1.22%
• 1M: -1.22%
• 6M: -11.12%
• YTD: -13.58%
• 1Y: -14.30%
• 3Y*: 0.19%
• 5Y*: 3.66%
• 10Y*: 6.17%

CI2G.L

• 1D: 0.99%
• 1M: -1.49%
• 6M: -8.25%
• YTD: -10.36%
• 1Y: -12.51%
• 3Y*: 2.41%
• 5Y*: 4.26%
• 10Y*: 6.61%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XNIF.L Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C	-13.58%	-1.71%	6.70%	11.98%	5.08%	23.10%	7.50%	5.06%	-1.17%	23.90%
CI2G.L Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD	-10.36%	-5.26%	11.34%	12.20%	2.39%	24.86%	10.51%	1.30%	-2.54%	36.62%

Correlation

The correlation between XNIF.L and CI2G.L is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2010	0.81

The correlation between XNIF.L and CI2G.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (all time) to 0.96 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XNIF.L	CI2G.L
Technology	22.4%	8.2%
Consumer Cyclical	19.7%	12.5%
Communication Services	17.1%	4.7%
Financial Services	11.0%	28.3%
Healthcare	11.0%	6.3%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	6.0%
Energy	5.4%	9.0%
Basic Materials	2.6%	8.4%
Industrials	2.3%	10.7%
Utilities	0.9%	4.5%
Real Estate	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XNIF.L

XNIF.L Risk / Return Rank: 3
XNIF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
XNIF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
XNIF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3
XNIF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
XNIF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3

CI2G.L

CI2G.L Risk / Return Rank: 3
CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
CI2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3

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.

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XNIF.L) and Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.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.

	XNIF.L	CI2G.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.94	-0.79	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.32	-1.07	-0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	0.88	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.68	-0.63	-0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.24	-1.25	+0.01

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XNIF.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.94, which is comparable to the CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XNIF.L and CI2G.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.

Drawdowns

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XNIF.L drawdown since its inception was -78.21%, which is greater than CI2G.L's maximum drawdown of -45.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XNIF.L and CI2G.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XNIF.L	CI2G.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.21%	-45.02%	-33.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.09%	-19.88%	-1.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.36%	-26.75%	+1.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.36%	-26.75%	+1.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.55%	-37.13%	-1.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.79%	-21.46%	-0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.76%	-13.42%	-20.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.52%	10.01%	+1.51%

Volatility

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XNIF.L) has a higher volatility of 4.36% compared to Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) at 4.15%. This indicates that XNIF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CI2G.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XNIF.L	CI2G.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.36%	4.15%	+0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.78%	13.02%	-0.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.13%	15.75%	-0.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.78%	16.05%	+4.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.81%	19.19%	+2.62%

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XNIF.L has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CI2G.L's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

XNIF.L vs. CI2G.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XNIF.L nor CI2G.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XNIF.L and CI2G.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, XNIF.L and CI2G.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.

Which ETF is better, XNIF.L or CI2G.L?

On fees, CI2G.L is cheaper at 0.80% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XNIF.L or CI2G.L?

CI2G.L is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XNIF.L.

What is the main difference between XNIF.L and CI2G.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI India NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for XNIF.L and 0.80% for CI2G.L.