PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX

Last updated Jul 16, 2026
Documentation

ACDC.AX (Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF) and CURE.AX (Global X S&P Biotech ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ACDC.AX is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index, while CURE.AX is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ACDC.AX returned 12.89%/yr vs 5.62%/yr for CURE.AX. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ACDC.AX charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CURE.AX.

Performance

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a A$10,000 investment in Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF (ACDC.AX) and Global X S&P Biotech ETF (CURE.AX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACDC.AX achieves a 5.57% return, which is significantly lower than CURE.AX's 22.66% return.

ACDC.AX

1D
-0.70%
1M
-13.60%
6M
-5.45%
YTD
5.57%
1Y
56.36%
3Y*
15.49%
5Y*
12.89%
10Y*
—

CURE.AX

1D
0.58%
1M
17.05%
6M
20.39%
YTD
22.66%
1Y
65.69%
3Y*
21.60%
5Y*
5.62%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
ACDC.AX
Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF		5.57%59.62%7.63%7.32%-8.33%20.60%63.17%18.91%-7.67%
CURE.AX
Global X S&P Biotech ETF		22.66%25.25%8.13%10.63%-22.98%-17.10%38.31%35.60%-13.56%

Correlation

The correlation between ACDC.AX and CURE.AX is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.27

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.34

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2018

0.36

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF

Global X S&P Biotech ETF

Return for Risk

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ACDC.AX
ACDC.AX Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
ACDC.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
CURE.AX
CURE.AX Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
CURE.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CURE.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
CURE.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
CURE.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
CURE.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF (ACDC.AX) and Global X S&P Biotech ETF (CURE.AX). 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.

ACDC.AXCURE.AXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.87
2.62

-0.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.47
3.46

-0.99

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.43

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.68

5.80

-3.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.82

14.61

-5.80

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACDC.AX Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the CURE.AX Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACDC.AX and CURE.AX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACDC.AX drawdown since its inception was -27.23%, smaller than the maximum CURE.AX drawdown of -59.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACDC.AX and CURE.AX.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ACDC.AXCURE.AXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.23%

-59.81%

+32.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.29%

-11.68%

-8.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.50%

-28.37%

+1.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.07%

-50.92%

+23.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.68%

-5.45%

-14.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.15%

-27.38%

+19.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.25%

4.66%

+1.59%

Volatility

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF (ACDC.AX) is 7.06%, while Global X S&P Biotech ETF (CURE.AX) has a volatility of 9.67%. This indicates that ACDC.AX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CURE.AX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ACDC.AXCURE.AXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.06%

9.67%

-2.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.28%

21.01%

+2.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.13%

25.95%

+3.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.97%

30.91%

-8.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.12%

31.70%

-10.58%

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACDC.AX has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than CURE.AX's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACDC.AX vs. CURE.AX - Dividend Comparison

ACDC.AX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.39%, while CURE.AX has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
ACDC.AX
Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF		12.39%0.91%6.82%3.96%0.89%6.76%0.95%2.39%
CURE.AX
Global X S&P Biotech ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.06%11.64%9.47%2.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

ACDC.AX and CURE.AX have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CURE.AX is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CURE.AX is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for ACDC.AX.

ACDC.AX is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while CURE.AX is Health & Biotech Equities. ACDC.AX tracks Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index, while CURE.AX tracks S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for ACDC.AX and 0.45% for CURE.AX.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACDC.AX and CURE.AX

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