CAS vs. CQQQ
CAS (Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both China Equities funds. CAS is actively managed, while CQQQ is passively managed. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CAS charges 0.88%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.
Performance
CAS vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CAS
- 1D
- -1.70%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CQQQ
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 4.40%
- YTD
- 5.94%
- 6M
- 6.31%
- 1Y
- 34.10%
- 3Y*
- 12.46%
- 5Y*
- -7.05%
- 10Y*
- 6.15%
CAS vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
CAS Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF | -5.11% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 3.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between CAS and CQQQ is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2026 | 0.20 |
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
CAS vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
CAS
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CQQQ
CAS vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF (CAS) 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.
| CAS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.21 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.40 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 3.21 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CAS vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CAS drawdown since its inception was -5.11%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAS and CQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CAS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.11% | -73.99% | +68.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -24.41% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -35.93% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -66.96% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -73.99% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.11% | -47.45% | +42.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.16% | -28.35% | +25.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 10.66% | — |
Volatility
CAS vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CAS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 10.52% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 23.15% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.51% | 30.57% | -17.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.51% | 38.15% | -24.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.51% | 33.39% | -19.88% |
CAS vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
CAS has a 0.88% expense ratio, which is higher than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
CAS vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
CAS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CAS Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income 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% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.04% | 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
CAS and CQQQ have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CQQQ is cheaper at 0.70% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CQQQ is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for CAS.
CQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.04%, compared with 0.00% for CAS.
They also come from different issuers: Simplify and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.88% for CAS and 0.70% for CQQQ.
Find the right allocation for CAS 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