PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) and ANXG.L (Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD) are both Nasdaq-100 funds tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, from iShares and Amundi respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNDX.L returned 21.62%/yr vs 21.72%/yr for ANXG.L. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CNDX.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for ANXG.L.

Performance

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with CNDX.L having a 19.65% return and ANXG.L slightly lower at 19.59%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CNDX.L having a 21.62% annualized return and ANXG.L not far ahead at 21.72%.

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%

ANXG.L

1D
-0.59%
1M
8.72%
YTD
19.59%
6M
19.35%
1Y
40.50%
3Y*
28.06%
5Y*
17.78%
10Y*
21.72%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		19.65%19.75%26.45%56.31%-33.45%27.96%48.33%38.07%-1.03%32.36%
ANXG.L
Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD		19.59%20.12%26.56%55.81%-33.39%28.67%47.76%40.10%-1.80%31.63%

Correlation

The correlation between CNDX.L and ANXG.L is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

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

0.87

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

0.93

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

0.94

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016

0.93

The correlation between CNDX.L and ANXG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CNDX.L
ANXG.L

Technology

57.3%
53.7%

Communication Services

14.5%
15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

11.6%
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%
7.7%

Healthcare

3.8%
4.2%

Industrials

2.8%
3.1%

Utilities

1.3%
1.4%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.1%

Energy

0.5%
0.6%

Financial Services

0.2%
0.2%

Real Estate

0.1%
0.1%

Technology

CNDX.L
57.3%
ANXG.L
53.7%

Communication Services

CNDX.L
14.5%
ANXG.L
15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

CNDX.L
11.6%
ANXG.L
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

CNDX.L
6.9%
ANXG.L
7.7%

Healthcare

CNDX.L
3.8%
ANXG.L
4.2%

Industrials

CNDX.L
2.8%
ANXG.L
3.1%

Utilities

CNDX.L
1.3%
ANXG.L
1.4%

Basic Materials

CNDX.L
1.1%
ANXG.L
1.1%

Energy

CNDX.L
0.5%
ANXG.L
0.6%

Financial Services

CNDX.L
0.2%
ANXG.L
0.2%

Real Estate

CNDX.L
0.1%
ANXG.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

Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD

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 ANXG.L:
ANXG.L vs. QQQANXG.L vs. USTANXG.L vs. EQQQ.LANXG.L vs. LGEN.LANXG.L vs. AEDAXANXG.L vs. JUP.LANXG.L vs. EQQQ.DE

Return for Risk

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.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
ANXG.L
ANXG.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
ANXG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ANXG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
ANXG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
ANXG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
ANXG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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. ANXG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXG.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.LANXG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.52
2.66

-0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.50
3.60

-0.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.44

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.61

3.66

-0.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.03

13.38

-0.34

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

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the ANXG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNDX.L and ANXG.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.LANXG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.52

2.66

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

0.87

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.07

1.10

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.12

1.12

0.00

Drawdowns

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNDX.L drawdown since its inception was -35.17%, roughly equal to the maximum ANXG.L drawdown of -35.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNDX.L and ANXG.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CNDX.LANXG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.17%

-35.18%

+0.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-11.02%

+0.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.44%

-23.10%

+0.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.17%

-35.18%

+0.01%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.17%

-35.18%

+0.01%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.76%

-0.78%

+0.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.30%

-6.07%

+0.77%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.07%

3.02%

+0.05%

Volatility

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a higher volatility of 4.90% compared to Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXG.L) at 4.31%. This indicates that CNDX.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ANXG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CNDX.LANXG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.90%

4.31%

+0.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.88%

11.21%

+0.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.79%

15.15%

+0.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.87%

20.44%

+0.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.07%

19.82%

+0.25%

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNDX.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than ANXG.L's 0.13% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNDX.L vs. ANXG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNDX.L nor ANXG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ANXG.L
Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD		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

CNDX.L and ANXG.L have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ANXG.L is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ANXG.L is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Both ETFs track NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CNDX.L and 0.13% for ANXG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNDX.L and ANXG.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