AGES.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AGES.L (iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AGES.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AGES.L returned 4.88%/yr vs 19.03%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AGES.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF (AGES.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGES.L achieves a 0.19% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.90% return.

AGES.L

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: -0.00%
• YTD: 0.19%
• 6M: 1.82%
• 1Y: 17.26%
• 3Y*: 10.51%
• 5Y*: 4.88%
• 10Y*: —

CNDX.L

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 11.63%
• YTD: 20.90%
• 6M: 19.16%
• 1Y: 42.84%
• 3Y*: 25.37%
• 5Y*: 19.03%
• 10Y*: 22.74%

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

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AGES.L iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF	0.19%	18.29%	9.75%	2.81%	-3.90%	5.94%	9.34%	15.79%	-8.27%	11.22%
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	20.90%	11.22%	28.66%	48.50%	-25.54%	29.17%	43.97%	32.82%	4.84%	20.91%

Correlation

The correlation between AGES.L and CNDX.L is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.50
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2016	0.66

The correlation between AGES.L and CNDX.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (1 year) to 0.66 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AGES.L	CNDX.L
Healthcare	47.0%	3.8%
Financial Services	43.9%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	11.6%
Real Estate	1.0%	0.1%
Basic Materials	0.2%	1.1%
Technology	0.1%	57.3%
Communication Services	0.1%	14.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.9%
Energy	-	0.5%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Utilities	-	1.3%

Return for Risk

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGES.L

AGES.L Risk / Return Rank: 45
AGES.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
AGES.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
AGES.L Omega Ratio Rank: 40
AGES.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
AGES.L Martin Ratio Rank: 51

CNDX.L

CNDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 75
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 74
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF (AGES.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.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.

	AGES.L	CNDX.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	2.68	-1.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.12	3.58	-1.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.48	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.52	3.80	-1.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.64	10.82	-2.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGES.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is lower than the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGES.L and CNDX.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AGES.L	CNDX.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.49	2.68	-1.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35	0.95	-0.60
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.12	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	1.18	-0.72

Drawdowns

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGES.L drawdown since its inception was -31.02%, which is greater than CNDX.L's maximum drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGES.L and CNDX.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AGES.L	CNDX.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.02%	-27.74%	-3.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.81%	-11.11%	+4.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.04%	-24.37%	+7.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.15%	-27.74%	+8.59%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-27.74%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.97%	0.00%	-2.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.90%	-4.72%	-0.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.99%	3.93%	-1.94%

Volatility

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF (AGES.L) is 2.73%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 4.91%. This indicates that AGES.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AGES.L	CNDX.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.73%	4.91%	-2.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.92%	11.61%	-2.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.53%	15.81%	-4.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.11%	20.08%	-5.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.49%	20.20%	-4.71%

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGES.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

AGES.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AGES.L nor CNDX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AGES.L iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.02%	0.05%	0.06%	0.03%	0.04%	0.07%	0.06%	0.30%	0.16%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AGES.L and CNDX.L in my portfolio?

AGES.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AGES.L or CNDX.L?

On fees, CNDX.L is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AGES.L or CNDX.L?

CNDX.L is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for AGES.L.

What is the main difference between AGES.L and CNDX.L?

AGES.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. AGES.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for AGES.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.