ASHS vs. CQQQ
ASHS (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both China Equities funds - ASHS tracks the CSI 500 Index while CQQQ tracks the AlphaShares China Technology Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASHS returned 3.27%/yr vs 5.40%/yr for CQQQ. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ASHS charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.
Performance
ASHS vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASHS achieves a 15.10% return, which is significantly higher than CQQQ's 2.46% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHS has underperformed CQQQ with an annualized return of 3.27%, while CQQQ has yielded a comparatively higher 5.40% annualized return.
ASHS
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- -0.19%
- YTD
- 15.10%
- 6M
- 23.90%
- 1Y
- 57.65%
- 3Y*
- 13.41%
- 5Y*
- 3.97%
- 10Y*
- 3.27%
CQQQ
- 1D
- -1.50%
- 1M
- 4.43%
- YTD
- 2.46%
- 6M
- 5.43%
- 1Y
- 32.76%
- 3Y*
- 10.55%
- 5Y*
- -7.50%
- 10Y*
- 5.40%
ASHS vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 15.10% | 39.48% | 2.68% | -10.03% | -24.78% | 17.66% | 28.22% | 24.53% | -35.91% | 7.90% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.46% | 34.96% | 9.84% | -16.71% | -30.09% | -24.54% | 57.33% | 33.57% | -34.77% | 74.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASHS and CQQQ is 0.78, 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 | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2014 | 0.66 |
The correlation between ASHS and CQQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (all time) to 0.80 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ASHS vs. CQQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASHS
CQQQ
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
-
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
ASHS
CQQQ
Industrials
ASHS
CQQQ
Basic Materials
ASHS
CQQQ
Healthcare
ASHS
CQQQ
-
Financial Services
ASHS
CQQQ
Consumer Cyclical
ASHS
CQQQ
Energy
ASHS
CQQQ
-
Communication Services
ASHS
CQQQ
Consumer Defensive
ASHS
CQQQ
-
Utilities
ASHS
CQQQ
-
Real Estate
ASHS
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
ASHS vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
ASHS
CQQQ
ASHS vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) 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.
| ASHS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.57 | 1.11 | +1.46 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.27 | 1.68 | +1.58 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.20 | +0.22 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.13 | 1.35 | +2.78 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.72 | 3.16 | +10.56 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ASHS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.57 | 1.11 | +1.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 | -0.20 | +0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.13 | 0.16 | -0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.19 | 0.19 | 0.00 |
Drawdowns
ASHS vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASHS drawdown since its inception was -69.90%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHS and CQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASHS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -69.90% | -73.99% | +4.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.03% | -24.41% | +10.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.13% | -35.93% | +1.80% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.81% | -66.96% | +19.15% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -47.81% | -73.99% | +26.18% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -33.57% | -49.18% | +15.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.57% | -28.29% | -20.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.21% | 10.39% | -6.18% |
Volatility
ASHS vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) is 7.33%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 11.60%. This indicates that ASHS 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
| ASHS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.33% | 11.60% | -4.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.00% | 21.88% | -4.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.59% | 29.78% | -7.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.46% | 38.02% | -11.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.57% | 33.30% | -7.73% |
ASHS vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASHS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASHS vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.69% | 0.65% | 1.90% | 0.76% | 0.43% | 0.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 8.34% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.11% | 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
ASHS and CQQQ have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CQQQ has higher volatility (11.60%) compared to ASHS (7.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs CQQQ's -73.99%.
On 10-year performance, CQQQ leads with 5.40% vs 3.27% for ASHS. On fees, ASHS is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASHS has been the lower-risk option at 7.33%. 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 5.40% return vs 3.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ASHS is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for CQQQ.
CQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.11%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.
ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index, while CQQQ tracks AlphaShares China Technology Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHS and 0.70% for CQQQ.
ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 1.11), 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 ASHS 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