ASHR vs. CQQQ
ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both China Equities funds - ASHR tracks the CSI 300 Index while CQQQ tracks the FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASHR returned 5.90%/yr vs 5.94%/yr for CQQQ. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ASHR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.
Performance
ASHR vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASHR achieves a 9.16% return, which is significantly higher than CQQQ's 3.88% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ASHR having a 5.90% annualized return and CQQQ not far ahead at 5.94%.
ASHR
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 1.44%
- YTD
- 9.16%
- 6M
- 9.26%
- 1Y
- 34.40%
- 3Y*
- 12.55%
- 5Y*
- -0.97%
- 10Y*
- 5.90%
CQQQ
- 1D
- 0.88%
- 1M
- 2.37%
- YTD
- 3.88%
- 6M
- 4.08%
- 1Y
- 25.88%
- 3Y*
- 11.73%
- 5Y*
- -8.02%
- 10Y*
- 5.94%
ASHR vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 9.16% | 27.02% | 11.95% | -12.52% | -27.52% | -1.57% | 36.29% | 36.50% | -28.45% | 33.47% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 3.88% | 34.96% | 9.84% | -16.71% | -30.09% | -24.54% | 57.33% | 33.57% | -34.77% | 74.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASHR and CQQQ is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2013 | 0.70 |
The correlation between ASHR and CQQQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
ASHR vs. CQQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASHR
CQQQ
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
-
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Communication Services
Real Estate
-
Technology
ASHR
CQQQ
Financial Services
ASHR
CQQQ
Industrials
ASHR
CQQQ
Basic Materials
ASHR
CQQQ
Consumer Defensive
ASHR
CQQQ
-
Consumer Cyclical
ASHR
CQQQ
Healthcare
ASHR
CQQQ
-
Utilities
ASHR
CQQQ
-
Energy
ASHR
CQQQ
-
Communication Services
ASHR
CQQQ
Real Estate
ASHR
CQQQ
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ASHR vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
ASHR
CQQQ
ASHR vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) 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.
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.
| ASHR | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.17 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.49 | 1.07 | +3.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.97 | 2.43 | +10.54 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ASHR vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASHR drawdown since its inception was -51.30%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHR and CQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASHR | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.30% | -73.99% | +22.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.69% | -24.41% | +16.72% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.12% | -35.93% | +2.81% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.59% | -66.96% | +22.37% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -51.30% | -73.99% | +22.69% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.36% | -48.47% | +32.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.12% | -28.36% | -0.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.66% | 10.70% | -8.04% |
Volatility
ASHR vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) is 7.34%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 10.77%. This indicates that ASHR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASHR | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.34% | 10.77% | -3.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.96% | 23.31% | -10.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.89% | 30.64% | -12.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.01% | 38.16% | -14.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.09% | 33.38% | -9.29% |
ASHR vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASHR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASHR vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
ASHR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, more than CQQQ's 2.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 2.11% | 2.31% | 1.13% | 2.48% | 1.13% | 0.88% | 0.81% | 0.98% | 1.32% | 0.84% | 0.73% | 30.13% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.08% | 2.17% | 0.28% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.41% | 1.69% | 1.77% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ASHR and CQQQ have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CQQQ has higher volatility (10.77%) compared to ASHR (7.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHR dropped -51.30% vs CQQQ's -73.99%.
On 10-year performance, CQQQ leads with 5.94% vs 5.90% for ASHR. On fees, ASHR is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASHR has been the lower-risk option at 7.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CQQQ has performed better with a 5.94% return vs 5.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ASHR is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for CQQQ.
ASHR has the higher dividend yield at 2.11%, compared with 2.08% for CQQQ.
ASHR tracks CSI 300 Index, while CQQQ tracks FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: DWS and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHR and 0.70% for CQQQ.
ASHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 0.85), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for ASHR and CQQQ
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