AFTY vs. CQQQ

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF (AFTY) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ).

AFTY and CQQQ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. AFTY is a passively managed fund by Pacer that tracks the performance of the FTSE China A 50. It was launched on Mar 12, 2015. CQQQ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the AlphaShares China Technology Index. It was launched on Dec 8, 2009. Both AFTY and CQQQ are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

AFTY vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF (AFTY) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

AFTY vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AFTY Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF	0.00%	0.00%	20.48%	-12.80%	-22.47%	-7.37%	33.77%	44.23%	-24.26%	45.15%
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF	-11.50%	34.96%	9.84%	-16.71%	-30.09%	-24.54%	57.33%	33.57%	-34.77%	74.31%

Returns By Period

AFTY

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CQQQ

• 1D: 2.91%
• 1M: -11.62%
• YTD: -11.50%
• 6M: -20.29%
• 1Y: 6.15%
• 3Y*: 0.59%
• 5Y*: -10.73%
• 10Y*: 3.76%

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

AFTY vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AFTY and CQQQ have an expense ratio of 0.70%.

AFTY

Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF

CQQQ

Invesco China Technology ETF

Return for Risk

AFTY vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CQQQ

CQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 18
CQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
CQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
CQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 20
CQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
CQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

AFTY vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF (AFTY) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AFTY	CQQQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	0.19	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.29	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	0.16	—

Correlation

The correlation between AFTY and CQQQ is 0.59, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

AFTY vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison

AFTY has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AFTY Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	2.23%	2.08%	1.84%	1.48%	7.96%	1.85%	6.62%	1.19%	16.76%
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF	2.45%	2.17%	0.28%	0.55%	0.08%	0.00%	0.47%	0.01%	0.43%	1.41%	1.69%	1.77%

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	AFTY	CQQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-73.99%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-24.41%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-67.04%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-56.10%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-28.04%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	8.99%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AFTY	CQQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	10.60%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	20.75%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	31.95%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	37.72%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	33.06%	—