PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CNDX.L vs. BCOG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CNDX.L vs. BCOG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF (BCOG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CNDX.L is traded in USD, while BCOG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the BCOG.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 BCOG.L's 24.67% 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%

BCOG.L

1D
-1.30%
1M
-3.62%
YTD
24.67%
6M
24.40%
1Y
36.80%
3Y*
15.41%
5Y*
11.24%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNDX.L vs. BCOG.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%12.40%
BCOG.L
L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF
24.68%16.33%4.36%-7.69%15.53%27.87%-3.37%5.91%-10.04%6.14%

Correlation

The correlation between CNDX.L and BCOG.L is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.11

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

0.03

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

0.08

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2017

0.14

The correlation between CNDX.L and BCOG.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.14 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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


Sectors
CNDX.L
BCOG.L

Technology

57.3%
5.6%

Communication Services

14.5%
12.3%

Consumer Cyclical

11.6%
12.9%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%
9.7%

Healthcare

3.8%

-

Industrials

2.8%

-

Utilities

1.3%

-

Basic Materials

1.1%
35.8%

Energy

0.5%

-

Financial Services

0.2%
17.8%

Real Estate

0.1%
5.8%

Technology

CNDX.L
57.3%
BCOG.L
5.6%

Communication Services

CNDX.L
14.5%
BCOG.L
12.3%

Consumer Cyclical

CNDX.L
11.6%
BCOG.L
12.9%

Consumer Defensive

CNDX.L
6.9%
BCOG.L
9.7%

Healthcare

CNDX.L
3.8%
BCOG.L

-

Industrials

CNDX.L
2.8%
BCOG.L

-

Utilities

CNDX.L
1.3%
BCOG.L

-

Basic Materials

CNDX.L
1.1%
BCOG.L
35.8%

Energy

CNDX.L
0.5%
BCOG.L

-

Financial Services

CNDX.L
0.2%
BCOG.L
17.8%

Real Estate

CNDX.L
0.1%
BCOG.L
5.8%

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

CNDX.L vs. BCOG.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

BCOG.L
BCOG.L Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
BCOG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BCOG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
BCOG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
BCOG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
BCOG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
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. BCOG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF (BCOG.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.LBCOG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.90

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.36

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.61

4.36

-0.75

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.03

10.13

+2.91

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

The current CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the BCOG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNDX.L and BCOG.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.LBCOG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.52

2.07

+0.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

0.65

+0.19

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

0.52

+0.61

Drawdowns

CNDX.L vs. BCOG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNDX.L drawdown since its inception was -35.17%, which is greater than BCOG.L's maximum drawdown of -33.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNDX.L and BCOG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CNDX.LBCOG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.17%

-33.29%

-1.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-8.41%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.44%

-12.28%

-10.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.17%

-25.85%

-9.32%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.76%

-5.56%

+4.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.30%

-12.21%

+6.91%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.07%

3.62%

-0.55%

Volatility

CNDX.L vs. BCOG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) is 4.90%, while L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF (BCOG.L) has a volatility of 6.23%. This indicates that CNDX.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BCOG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CNDX.LBCOG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.90%

6.23%

-1.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.88%

15.62%

-3.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.79%

17.68%

-1.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.87%

17.32%

+3.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.07%

16.02%

+4.05%

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

CNDX.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than BCOG.L's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

CNDX.L vs. BCOG.L - Dividend Comparison

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


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BCOG.L
L&G All Commodities UCITS 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%
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 BCOG.L have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, BCOG.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

BCOG.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

CNDX.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while BCOG.L is Commodities. CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while BCOG.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CNDX.L and 0.15% for BCOG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNDX.L and BCOG.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