XX25.L vs. CNAA.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

XX25.L (Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C) and CNAA.L (Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR) are both China Equities funds - XX25.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while CNAA.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XX25.L returned 2.76%/yr vs 4.08%/yr for CNAA.L. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XX25.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNAA.L.

Performance

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (XX25.L) and Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

XX25.L is traded in GBp, while CNAA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CNAA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XX25.L achieves a 1.17% return, which is significantly lower than CNAA.L's 4.25% return. Over the past 10 years, XX25.L has underperformed CNAA.L with an annualized return of 2.76%, while CNAA.L has yielded a comparatively higher 4.08% annualized return.

XX25.L

• 1D: -3.02%
• 1M: -8.75%
• 6M: -2.16%
• YTD: 1.17%
• 1Y: 20.30%
• 3Y*: 11.79%
• 5Y*: -0.90%
• 10Y*: 2.76%

CNAA.L

• 1D: -1.86%
• 1M: -6.86%
• 6M: 0.83%
• YTD: 4.25%
• 1Y: 23.83%
• 3Y*: 8.50%
• 5Y*: -0.89%
• 10Y*: 4.08%

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

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XX25.L Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C	1.17%	17.72%	29.08%	-18.23%	-11.14%	-19.11%	6.62%	10.00%	-7.19%	23.45%
CNAA.L Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR	4.25%	17.14%	12.85%	-18.48%	-17.18%	4.19%	38.58%	31.66%	-26.27%	11.58%

Correlation

The correlation between XX25.L and CNAA.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	0.76
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.73
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2014	0.70

Over the past year, XX25.L and CNAA.L have become more correlated (0.93) than their long-term average of 0.70, meaning their price movements have been converging.

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XX25.L	CNAA.L
Technology	31.9%	33.2%
Financial Services	17.5%	16.8%
Industrials	15.3%	17.4%
Basic Materials	11.3%	10.2%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	6.0%
Consumer Cyclical	5.2%	4.8%
Healthcare	3.9%	3.8%
Utilities	3.3%	2.9%
Energy	3.1%	2.7%
Communication Services	1.3%	0.5%
Real Estate	0.5%	0.6%

Return for Risk

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XX25.L

XX25.L Risk / Return Rank: 42
XX25.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
XX25.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
XX25.L Omega Ratio Rank: 39
XX25.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
XX25.L Martin Ratio Rank: 52

CNAA.L

CNAA.L Risk / Return Rank: 58
CNAA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CNAA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
CNAA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 48
CNAA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
CNAA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (XX25.L) and Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAA.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.

	XX25.L	CNAA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.11	1.31	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	1.85	-0.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.24	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	2.61	-0.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.63	8.14	-1.51

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XX25.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.11, which is comparable to the CNAA.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XX25.L and CNAA.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

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XX25.L drawdown since its inception was -99.38%, which is greater than CNAA.L's maximum drawdown of -50.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XX25.L and CNAA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XX25.L	CNAA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.38%	-50.93%	-48.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.99%	-9.52%	-2.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.85%	-26.66%	-9.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.47%	-42.50%	-1.97%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.65%	-45.04%	-9.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.96%	-15.29%	-10.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-40.71%	-25.69%	-15.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.06%	3.06%	0.00%

Volatility

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (XX25.L) and Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAA.L) have volatilities of 8.98% and 8.64%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	XX25.L	CNAA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.98%	8.64%	+0.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.93%	14.64%	-0.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.32%	18.99%	-0.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.33%	21.83%	+8.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.19%	22.33%	+3.86%

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XX25.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than CNAA.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

XX25.L vs. CNAA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XX25.L nor CNAA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XX25.L and CNAA.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, XX25.L and CNAA.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, XX25.L or CNAA.L?

On fees, CNAA.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XX25.L or CNAA.L?

CNAA.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for XX25.L.

What is the main difference between XX25.L and CNAA.L?

XX25.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while CNAA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for XX25.L and 0.35% for CNAA.L.