PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ANXG.L (Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD) and CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Nasdaq-100 funds tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, from Amundi and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ANXG.L returned 22.61%/yr vs 22.43%/yr for CNX1.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. ANXG.L charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for CNX1.L.

Performance

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXG.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ANXG.L having a 19.88% return and CNX1.L slightly lower at 19.85%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ANXG.L having a 22.61% annualized return and CNX1.L not far behind at 22.43%.

ANXG.L

1D
-0.64%
1M
9.65%
YTD
19.88%
6M
18.47%
1Y
41.85%
3Y*
24.84%
5Y*
19.03%
10Y*
22.61%

CNX1.L

1D
-0.63%
1M
9.63%
YTD
19.85%
6M
18.42%
1Y
41.69%
3Y*
24.68%
5Y*
18.83%
10Y*
22.43%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ANXG.L
Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD		19.88%11.70%28.70%48.00%-25.42%29.85%43.37%34.20%4.47%20.19%
CNX1.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		19.85%11.57%28.51%47.71%-25.53%29.50%43.24%33.63%4.62%20.13%

Correlation

The correlation between ANXG.L and CNX1.L is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

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

0.89

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

0.96

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

0.97

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016

0.98

The correlation between ANXG.L and CNX1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ANXG.L
CNX1.L

Technology

53.7%
57.3%

Communication Services

15.8%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%
11.6%

Consumer Defensive

7.7%
6.9%

Healthcare

4.2%
3.8%

Industrials

3.1%
2.8%

Utilities

1.4%
1.3%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.1%

Energy

0.6%
0.5%

Financial Services

0.2%
0.2%

Real Estate

0.1%
0.1%

Technology

ANXG.L
53.7%
CNX1.L
57.3%

Communication Services

ANXG.L
15.8%
CNX1.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

ANXG.L
12.2%
CNX1.L
11.6%

Consumer Defensive

ANXG.L
7.7%
CNX1.L
6.9%

Healthcare

ANXG.L
4.2%
CNX1.L
3.8%

Industrials

ANXG.L
3.1%
CNX1.L
2.8%

Utilities

ANXG.L
1.4%
CNX1.L
1.3%

Basic Materials

ANXG.L
1.1%
CNX1.L
1.1%

Energy

ANXG.L
0.6%
CNX1.L
0.5%

Financial Services

ANXG.L
0.2%
CNX1.L
0.2%

Real Estate

ANXG.L
0.1%
CNX1.L
0.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

Often compared with ANXG.L:
ANXG.L vs. QQQANXG.L vs. USTANXG.L vs. EQQQ.LANXG.L vs. LGEN.LANXG.L vs. AEDAXANXG.L vs. JUP.LANXG.L vs. EQQQ.DE
Often compared with CNX1.L:
CNX1.L vs. CNDX.LCNX1.L vs. EQQQ.LCNX1.L vs. IITU.LCNX1.L vs. EQGB.LCNX1.L vs. QQQCNX1.L vs. XNAQ.LCNX1.L vs. SXRV.DE

Return for Risk

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ANXG.L
ANXG.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
ANXG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ANXG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
ANXG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
ANXG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
ANXG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
CNX1.L
CNX1.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXG.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.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.

ANXG.LCNX1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.85
2.82

+0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.67
3.72

-0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.50

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.75

3.76

-0.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.95

11.10

-0.15

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ANXG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.85, which is comparable to the CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ANXG.L and CNX1.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

ANXG.LCNX1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.85

2.82

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.99

0.98

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.17

1.16

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.18

1.14

+0.03

Drawdowns

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ANXG.L drawdown since its inception was -27.69%, roughly equal to the maximum CNX1.L drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ANXG.L and CNX1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ANXG.LCNX1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.69%

-27.56%

-0.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.12%

-11.03%

-0.09%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.54%

-24.56%

+0.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.69%

-27.56%

-0.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.69%

-27.56%

-0.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.64%

-0.63%

-0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.35%

-4.57%

-0.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.81%

3.75%

+0.06%

Volatility

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXG.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) have volatilities of 4.14% and 4.13%, 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

ANXG.LCNX1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.14%

4.13%

+0.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.39%

10.38%

+0.01%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.62%

14.70%

-0.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.12%

19.16%

-0.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.31%

19.44%

-0.13%

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ANXG.L has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than CNX1.L's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

ANXG.L vs. CNX1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ANXG.L nor CNX1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

ANXG.L and CNX1.L have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ANXG.L is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ANXG.L is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for CNX1.L.

Both ETFs track NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for ANXG.L and 0.36% for CNX1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ANXG.L and CNX1.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