PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CEMU.AS vs. QQQM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI EMU UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (CEMU.AS) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CEMU.AS is traded in EUR, while QQQM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the QQQM values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEMU.AS achieves a 10.76% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 19.95% return.


CEMU.AS

1D
0.00%
1M
2.32%
YTD
10.76%
6M
11.69%
1Y
23.06%
3Y*
17.11%
5Y*
10.75%
10Y*
11.42%

QQQM

1D
0.00%
1M
-0.24%
YTD
19.95%
6M
18.42%
1Y
35.49%
3Y*
24.81%
5Y*
17.18%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
CEMU.AS
iShares Core MSCI EMU UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
10.76%24.42%10.08%18.65%-11.71%23.11%8.53%
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
20.80%6.51%33.98%50.36%-28.34%36.98%2.51%

Correlation

The correlation between CEMU.AS and QQQM is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.43

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

0.34

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

0.37

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2020

0.36

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

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEMU.AS
CEMU.AS Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
CEMU.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEMU.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEMU.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
CEMU.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEMU.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

QQQM
QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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.

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI EMU UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (CEMU.AS) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). 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.


CEMU.ASQQQMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.36

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.26

3.24

-0.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.47

9.96

-1.49

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEMU.AS Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is comparable to the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEMU.AS and QQQM, 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...

Drawdowns

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEMU.AS drawdown since its inception was -38.38%, which is greater than QQQM's maximum drawdown of -30.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMU.AS and QQQM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CEMU.ASQQQMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.38%

-30.95%

-7.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.17%

-10.99%

+0.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.40%

-27.16%

+11.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.51%

-30.95%

+6.44%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.38%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.75%

-3.15%

+1.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.22%

-7.29%

+1.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.72%

3.57%

-0.85%

Volatility

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI EMU UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (CEMU.AS) is 3.25%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 8.08%. This indicates that CEMU.AS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CEMU.ASQQQMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.25%

8.08%

-4.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.24%

13.39%

-1.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.62%

17.64%

-3.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.20%

22.14%

-5.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.84%

21.84%

-5.00%

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEMU.AS has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

CEMU.AS vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

CEMU.AS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQQM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.44%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CEMU.AS
iShares Core MSCI EMU UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
0.44%0.50%0.61%0.65%0.83%0.40%0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions


CEMU.AS and QQQM have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CEMU.AS is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CEMU.AS is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for QQQM.

CEMU.AS is categorized as Europe Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. CEMU.AS tracks MSCI EMU NR EUR, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for CEMU.AS and 0.15% for QQQM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CEMU.AS and QQQM

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