CAAS vs. CQQQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CAAS (China Automotive Systems, Inc.) is a stock, while CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) is China Equities fund tracking the AlphaShares China Technology Index. Over the past 10 years, CAAS returned 2.70%/yr vs 5.40%/yr for CQQQ. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CAAS vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in China Automotive Systems, Inc. (CAAS) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAAS achieves a 4.11% return, which is significantly higher than CQQQ's 2.46% return. Over the past 10 years, CAAS has underperformed CQQQ with an annualized return of 2.70%, while CQQQ has yielded a comparatively higher 5.40% annualized return.

CAAS

• 1D: -1.22%
• 1M: -0.56%
• YTD: 4.11%
• 6M: 7.65%
• 1Y: 9.24%
• 3Y*: 2.72%
• 5Y*: 2.09%
• 10Y*: 2.70%

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%

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

CAAS vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CAAS China Automotive Systems, Inc.	4.11%	3.90%	52.01%	-44.31%	116.42%	-57.05%	98.10%	29.10%	-49.17%	-10.45%
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 CAAS and CQQQ is 0.10, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.26
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2009	0.26

The correlation between CAAS and CQQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.10 (1 year) to 0.26 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CAAS vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAAS

CAAS Risk / Return Rank: 49
CAAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
CAAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
CAAS Omega Ratio Rank: 44
CAAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
CAAS Martin Ratio Rank: 49

CQQQ

CQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 28
CQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
CQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
CQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 30
CQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
CQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

CAAS vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for China Automotive Systems, Inc. (CAAS) 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.

	CAAS	CQQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.29	1.11	-0.81
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.70	1.68	-0.98
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.20	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.46	1.35	-0.89
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.82	3.16	-2.34
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CAAS vs. CQQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAAS Sharpe Ratio is 0.29, which is lower than the CQQQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAAS and CQQQ, 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

	CAAS	CQQQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29	1.11	-0.81
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.04	-0.20	+0.24
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.03	0.16	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.00	0.19	-0.18

Drawdowns

CAAS vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAAS drawdown since its inception was -94.04%, which is greater than CQQQ's maximum drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAAS and CQQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAAS	CQQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.04%	-73.99%	-20.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.32%	-24.41%	+4.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-44.96%	-35.93%	-9.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-68.16%	-66.96%	-1.20%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-80.21%	-73.99%	-6.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-79.43%	-49.18%	-30.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-71.83%	-28.29%	-43.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.31%	10.39%	+0.92%

Volatility

CAAS vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for China Automotive Systems, Inc. (CAAS) is 8.50%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 11.60%. This indicates that CAAS 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.

Volatility by Period

	CAAS	CQQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.50%	11.60%	-3.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.73%	21.88%	-2.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.81%	29.78%	+2.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	55.92%	38.02%	+17.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	82.43%	33.30%	+49.13%

Dividends

CAAS vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison

CAAS 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
CAAS China Automotive Systems, Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	19.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both CAAS and CQQQ in my portfolio?

CAAS and CQQQ have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CAAS or CQQQ?

CQQQ has higher volatility (11.60%) compared to CAAS (8.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAAS dropped -94.04% vs CQQQ's -73.99%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CQQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.11 vs 0.29), 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.