IShares China Competition
| FXAC Etf | 4.18 -0.05 -1.18% |
IShares China vs IShares MSCI Correlation Overview
Good diversification
The correlation between FXAC and IJPN is -0.18, which Macroaxis classifies as Good diversification for the selected horizon. The overlap area represents the portion of risk that may be diversified away when both instruments are held together and nothing else in the portfolio changes.
Moving together with IShares Etf
| 1.0 | FXC | iShares China Large | PairCorr |
| 0.95 | ICHN | iShares MSCI China | PairCorr |
| 0.95 | ICHD | iShares MSCI China | PairCorr |
Moving against IShares Etf
Mean reversion in IShares China is more reliable over longer time horizons. Short-term deviations can persist and even widen before correcting, making position sizing and risk management critical.
IShares China Competition Correlation Matrix
Correlation analysis between iShares China Large and its competitors helps investors understand whether diversification is real or only superficial inside the same peer group. This matrix is most informative when investors want to know whether adding another peer would improve diversification, increase crowding, or leave total risk largely unchanged.
High positive correlations
| High negative correlations
|
IShares China Competition Risk-Adjusted Indicators
There is a big difference between IShares Etf performing well and IShares China ETF doing well as a business compared to the competition. A thorough review of IShares China's risk-adjusted indicators provides a clearer picture of whether returns are being earned efficiently. These indicators are quantitative in nature and help investors forecast volatility and risk-adjusted expected returns across various positions.| Mean Deviation | Jensen Alpha | Sortino Ratio | Treynor Ratio | Semi Deviation | Expected Shortfall | Potential Upside | Value @Risk | Maximum Drawdown | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| META | 1.48 | 0.01 | 0.00 | -0.08 | 0.00 | 2.33 | 14.24 | |||
| MSFT | 1.26 | -0.26 | 0.00 | -0.63 | 0.00 | 2.19 | 13.28 | |||
| UBER | 1.52 | -0.11 | 0.00 | -0.30 | 0.00 | 3.18 | 11.09 | |||
| F | 1.34 | -0.10 | 0.00 | -0.18 | 0.00 | 3.61 | 10.01 | |||
| T | 1.11 | 0.19 | 0.20 | -1.16 | 1.17 | 3.87 | 8.53 | |||
| A | 1.26 | -0.28 | 0.00 | -0.36 | 0.00 | 2.48 | 7.20 | |||
| CRM | 1.82 | -0.38 | 0.00 | -0.67 | 0.00 | 3.41 | 9.78 | |||
| JPM | 1.12 | -0.02 | 0.00 | -0.10 | 0.00 | 2.02 | 8.17 | |||
| MRK | 1.13 | 0.32 | 0.25 | 0.62 | 1.22 | 2.54 | 7.29 | |||
| XOM | 1.34 | 0.44 | 0.34 | 5.51 | 1.15 | 2.90 | 6.83 |
IShares China Competitive Analysis
| Better Than Average | Worse Than Peers | View Performance Chart |
IShares China Competition Peer Performance Charts
How to Analyze IShares China Against Peers
IShares China's peer analysis compares IShares China with related companies to put valuation, quality, and risk metrics in context. This helps determine whether recent performance is company-specific or broadly sector-driven. A practical workflow includes:- Set a relevant peer group: Include direct competitors and close alternatives with comparable business exposure.
- Benchmark core financials: Compare profitability, growth, capital structure, and cash flow quality.
- Check valuation dispersion: Review whether IShares China trades at a premium or discount versus peers and why.
- Evaluate risk profile: Compare volatility, drawdowns, and correlation to avoid false diversification assumptions.
- Document the thesis: Record where IShares China leads or lags and what catalysts could close or widen the gap.
Peer Comparison Metrics & Methodology
Margin comparison for IShares China against peers is one of the most actionable outputs - it shows where competitive advantages may be strengthening or eroding over time. The peer set can help frame whether recent outperformance is broad-based or company-specific.
The analytics block for iShares China Large relies on fund disclosures and market reference feeds, with quality checks and normalization applied before rendering. Timing can vary by data vendor.