PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) and 5QQQ.L (Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. CNDX.L is passively managed, while 5QQQ.L is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNDX.L returned 27.98%/yr vs 74.24%/yr for 5QQQ.L. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. CNDX.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for 5QQQ.L.

Performance

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities (5QQQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CNDX.L is traded in USD, while 5QQQ.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the 5QQQ.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNDX.L achieves a 19.65% return, which is significantly lower than 5QQQ.L's 91.61% return.

CNDX.L

1D
-0.66%
1M
6.81%
YTD
19.65%
6M
18.66%
1Y
39.29%
3Y*
27.98%
5Y*
17.61%
10Y*
21.62%

5QQQ.L

1D
-3.32%
1M
44.78%
YTD
91.61%
6M
81.12%
1Y
210.54%
3Y*
74.24%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		19.65%19.75%26.45%56.31%-33.45%3.75%
5QQQ.L
Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities		91.62%2.40%73.88%427.83%-96.06%17.73%

Correlation

The correlation between CNDX.L and 5QQQ.L is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.96

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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2021

0.97

The correlation between CNDX.L and 5QQQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CNDX.L
5QQQ.L

Technology

57.3%
54.2%

Communication Services

14.5%
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

11.6%
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%
7.6%

Healthcare

3.8%
4.2%

Industrials

2.8%
2.8%

Utilities

1.3%
1.4%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.2%

Energy

0.5%
0.6%

Financial Services

0.2%
0.2%

Real Estate

0.1%
0.1%

Technology

CNDX.L
57.3%
5QQQ.L
54.2%

Communication Services

CNDX.L
14.5%
5QQQ.L
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CNDX.L
11.6%
5QQQ.L
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

CNDX.L
6.9%
5QQQ.L
7.6%

Healthcare

CNDX.L
3.8%
5QQQ.L
4.2%

Industrials

CNDX.L
2.8%
5QQQ.L
2.8%

Utilities

CNDX.L
1.3%
5QQQ.L
1.4%

Basic Materials

CNDX.L
1.1%
5QQQ.L
1.2%

Energy

CNDX.L
0.5%
5QQQ.L
0.6%

Financial Services

CNDX.L
0.2%
5QQQ.L
0.2%

Real Estate

CNDX.L
0.1%
5QQQ.L
0.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities

Often compared with CNDX.L:
CNDX.L vs. QQQCNDX.L vs. EQQQ.DECNDX.L vs. SXRV.DECNDX.L vs. CNX1.LCNDX.L vs. CSPX.LCNDX.L vs. EQQU.LCNDX.L vs. VWRA.L
Often compared with 5QQQ.L:
5QQQ.L vs. TQQQ5QQQ.L vs. QQQ3.L5QQQ.L vs. QQQ5QQQ.L vs. TSLI.L5QQQ.L vs. MRN3.L5QQQ.L vs. 3XFE.L5QQQ.L vs. SPMO

Return for Risk

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CNDX.L
CNDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
5QQQ.L
5QQQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
5QQQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
5QQQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
5QQQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
5QQQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
5QQQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
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.

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities (5QQQ.L). 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.

CNDX.L5QQQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.52
2.32

+0.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.50
2.87

+0.64

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.36

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.61

3.33

+0.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.03

7.73

+5.31

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the 5QQQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNDX.L and 5QQQ.L, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CNDX.L5QQQ.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.52

2.32

+0.19

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.07

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.12

-0.04

+1.16

Drawdowns

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNDX.L drawdown since its inception was -35.17%, smaller than the maximum 5QQQ.L drawdown of -96.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNDX.L and 5QQQ.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CNDX.L5QQQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.17%

-96.41%

+61.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-62.83%

+51.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.44%

-80.22%

+57.78%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.17%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.17%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.76%

-31.90%

+31.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.30%

-75.59%

+70.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.07%

27.12%

-24.05%

Volatility

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) is 4.90%, while Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities (5QQQ.L) has a volatility of 23.97%. This indicates that CNDX.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than 5QQQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CNDX.L5QQQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.90%

23.97%

-19.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.88%

58.10%

-46.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.79%

90.01%

-74.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.87%

107.69%

-86.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.07%

107.69%

-87.62%

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNDX.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than 5QQQ.L's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNDX.L vs. 5QQQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNDX.L nor 5QQQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
5QQQ.L
Leverage Shares 5x Long Nasdaq 100 ETP Securities		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.02%0.05%0.06%0.03%0.04%0.07%0.06%0.30%0.16%0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.96, CNDX.L and 5QQQ.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, CNDX.L is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CNDX.L is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for 5QQQ.L.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CNDX.L and 0.75% for 5QQQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNDX.L and 5QQQ.L

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