XX25.L vs. CNAL.L
XX25.L (Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C) and CNAL.L (Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR) are both China Equities funds - XX25.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while CNAL.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XX25.L returned 5.07%/yr vs 5.75%/yr for CNAL.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XX25.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNAL.L.
Performance
XX25.L vs. CNAL.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XX25.L having a 14.21% return and CNAL.L slightly lower at 13.91%. Over the past 10 years, XX25.L has underperformed CNAL.L with an annualized return of 5.07%, while CNAL.L has yielded a comparatively higher 5.75% annualized return.
XX25.L
- 1D
- 1.79%
- 1M
- 3.91%
- YTD
- 14.21%
- 6M
- 15.14%
- 1Y
- 40.90%
- 3Y*
- 16.17%
- 5Y*
- 0.67%
- 10Y*
- 5.07%
CNAL.L
- 1D
- 1.52%
- 1M
- 3.45%
- YTD
- 13.91%
- 6M
- 14.81%
- 1Y
- 40.49%
- 3Y*
- 12.02%
- 5Y*
- 0.80%
- 10Y*
- 5.75%
XX25.L vs. CNAL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XX25.L Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C | 14.21% | 17.72% | 29.08% | -18.23% | -11.14% | -19.11% | 6.62% | 10.00% | -7.19% | 23.45% |
CNAL.L Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR | 13.91% | 17.54% | 12.76% | -18.90% | -17.14% | 4.51% | 37.96% | 32.57% | -26.38% | 11.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between XX25.L and CNAL.L is 0.98 - 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 | 0.98 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2014 | 0.72 |
Over the past year, XX25.L and CNAL.L have become more correlated (0.98) than their long-term average of 0.72, meaning their price movements have been converging.
XX25.L vs. CNAL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Energy
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Financial Services
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Industrials
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Basic Materials
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Consumer Defensive
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Consumer Cyclical
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Healthcare
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Utilities
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Energy
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Communication Services
XX25.L
CNAL.L
Real Estate
XX25.L
CNAL.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
XX25.L vs. CNAL.L — Risk / Return Rank
XX25.L
CNAL.L
XX25.L vs. CNAL.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 (CNAL.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 | CNAL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.43 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.64 | 5.83 | -0.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.72 | 15.58 | +0.14 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XX25.L vs. CNAL.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XX25.L drawdown since its inception was -99.38%, which is greater than CNAL.L's maximum drawdown of -51.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XX25.L and CNAL.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XX25.L | CNAL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.38% | -51.00% | -48.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.21% | -6.91% | -0.30% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.85% | -26.58% | -9.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.66% | -42.38% | -5.28% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -54.65% | -45.10% | -9.55% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.42% | -7.42% | -9.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -40.78% | -26.81% | -13.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.59% | 2.59% | 0.00% |
Volatility
XX25.L vs. CNAL.L - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (XX25.L) and Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) have volatilities of 6.09% and 6.16%, 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
| XX25.L | CNAL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.09% | 6.16% | -0.07% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.53% | 11.48% | +0.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.52% | 16.40% | +0.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.20% | 21.50% | +8.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.10% | 21.94% | +4.16% |
XX25.L vs. CNAL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XX25.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than CNAL.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
XX25.L vs. CNAL.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XX25.L nor CNAL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.98, XX25.L and CNAL.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.
On fees, CNAL.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNAL.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for XX25.L.
XX25.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while CNAL.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 CNAL.L.
Find the right allocation for XX25.L and CNAL.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