PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CNDX.L vs. IAPD.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) and IAPD.L (iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS) are both exchange-traded funds - CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while IAPD.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Pacific NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNDX.L returned 22.02%/yr vs 7.35%/yr for IAPD.L. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNDX.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for IAPD.L.

Performance

CNDX.L vs. IAPD.L - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CNDX.L is traded in USD, while IAPD.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the IAPD.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 15.58% return, which is significantly higher than IAPD.L's 9.18% return. Over the past 10 years, CNDX.L has outperformed IAPD.L with an annualized return of 22.02%, while IAPD.L has yielded a comparatively lower 7.35% annualized return.

CNDX.L

1D
-0.45%
1M
-1.91%
YTD
15.58%
6M
14.84%
1Y
32.44%
3Y*
25.89%
5Y*
15.77%
10Y*
22.02%

IAPD.L

1D
0.34%
1M
-3.72%
YTD
9.18%
6M
8.23%
1Y
30.25%
3Y*
20.53%
5Y*
9.38%
10Y*
7.35%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		15.58%19.75%26.42%56.22%-33.49%27.92%48.25%37.96%-1.08%31.91%
IAPD.L
iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS		9.18%30.05%6.09%12.89%-2.04%3.80%-9.90%14.66%-15.20%16.87%

Correlation

The correlation between CNDX.L and IAPD.L is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.46

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

0.44

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

0.47

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

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2010

0.52

The correlation between CNDX.L and IAPD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
CNDX.L
IAPD.L

Technology

58.5%
1.8%

Communication Services

14.3%
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

11.4%
11.1%

Consumer Defensive

6.4%
4.6%

Healthcare

3.7%
3.4%

Industrials

2.8%
6.7%

Utilities

1.2%
4.1%

Basic Materials

1.0%
18.2%

Energy

0.5%
4.8%

Financial Services

0.2%
30.8%

Real Estate

0.1%
10.0%

Technology

CNDX.L
58.5%
IAPD.L
1.8%

Communication Services

CNDX.L
14.3%
IAPD.L
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

CNDX.L
11.4%
IAPD.L
11.1%

Consumer Defensive

CNDX.L
6.4%
IAPD.L
4.6%

Healthcare

CNDX.L
3.7%
IAPD.L
3.4%

Industrials

CNDX.L
2.8%
IAPD.L
6.7%

Utilities

CNDX.L
1.2%
IAPD.L
4.1%

Basic Materials

CNDX.L
1.0%
IAPD.L
18.2%

Energy

CNDX.L
0.5%
IAPD.L
4.8%

Financial Services

CNDX.L
0.2%
IAPD.L
30.8%

Real Estate

CNDX.L
0.1%
IAPD.L
10.0%

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

iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS

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 IAPD.L:
IAPD.L vs. 100D.LIAPD.L vs. JEPQIAPD.L vs. NOBLIAPD.L vs. VAPX.LIAPD.L vs. IJRIAPD.L vs. VOOIAPD.L vs. SCHD

Return for Risk

CNDX.L vs. IAPD.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: 6767
Overall Rank
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
IAPD.L
IAPD.L Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
IAPD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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. IAPD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS (IAPD.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.

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.

CNDX.LIAPD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.93
2.40

-0.46

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.73
3.40

-0.67

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.42

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.94

3.78

-0.85

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.18

11.17

-1.00

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

The current CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is comparable to the IAPD.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNDX.L and IAPD.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...

Drawdowns

CNDX.L vs. IAPD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNDX.L drawdown since its inception was -35.21%, smaller than the maximum IAPD.L drawdown of -70.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNDX.L and IAPD.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CNDX.LIAPD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.21%

-70.10%

+34.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-7.96%

-3.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.44%

-18.35%

-4.09%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.21%

-25.23%

-9.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.21%

-45.48%

+10.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.14%

-6.53%

+2.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.12%

-13.05%

+7.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.18%

2.70%

+0.48%

Volatility

CNDX.L vs. IAPD.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a higher volatility of 6.44% compared to iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS (IAPD.L) at 4.07%. This indicates that CNDX.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IAPD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CNDX.LIAPD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.44%

4.07%

+2.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.12%

10.25%

+2.87%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.70%

12.57%

+4.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.06%

14.99%

+6.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.12%

16.81%

+3.31%

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

CNDX.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than IAPD.L's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNDX.L vs. IAPD.L - Dividend Comparison

CNDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IAPD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.29%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 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%
IAPD.L
iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS		4.29%4.20%5.25%5.77%6.84%5.51%3.70%5.67%5.87%4.71%4.22%5.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

CNDX.L and IAPD.L have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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 0.59% for IAPD.L.

CNDX.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while IAPD.L is Asia Pacific Equities. CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while IAPD.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Pacific NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CNDX.L and 0.59% for IAPD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNDX.L and IAPD.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