PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CNDX.L vs. ICLN

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) and ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNDX.L returned 21.60%/yr vs 11.67%/yr for ICLN. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNDX.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ICLN.

Performance

CNDX.L vs. ICLN - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNDX.L achieves a 16.86% return, which is significantly lower than ICLN's 27.33% return. Over the past 10 years, CNDX.L has outperformed ICLN with an annualized return of 21.60%, while ICLN has yielded a comparatively lower 11.67% annualized return.

CNDX.L

1D
3.01%
1M
0.15%
YTD
16.86%
6M
18.12%
1Y
36.58%
3Y*
26.24%
5Y*
16.67%
10Y*
21.60%

ICLN

1D
0.87%
1M
-5.47%
YTD
27.33%
6M
27.01%
1Y
60.20%
3Y*
5.25%
5Y*
-0.21%
10Y*
11.67%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNDX.L vs. ICLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		16.86%19.75%26.42%56.22%-33.49%27.92%48.25%37.96%-1.08%31.91%
ICLN
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF		27.33%47.05%-25.72%-20.41%-5.43%-24.18%141.82%44.36%-9.03%21.47%

Correlation

The correlation between CNDX.L and ICLN is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.47

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

0.31

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

0.36

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

0.38

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

0.37

The correlation between CNDX.L and ICLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (3 years) to 0.47 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CNDX.L vs. ICLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CNDX.L
ICLN

Technology

60.0%
10.8%

Communication Services

13.5%

-

Consumer Cyclical

10.8%
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

6.4%

-

Healthcare

3.6%

-

Industrials

2.8%
26.2%

Utilities

1.1%
35.4%

Basic Materials

1.0%
1.3%

Energy

0.5%
24.9%

Financial Services

0.2%

-

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Technology

CNDX.L
60.0%
ICLN
10.8%

Communication Services

CNDX.L
13.5%
ICLN

-

Consumer Cyclical

CNDX.L
10.8%
ICLN
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

CNDX.L
6.4%
ICLN

-

Healthcare

CNDX.L
3.6%
ICLN

-

Industrials

CNDX.L
2.8%
ICLN
26.2%

Utilities

CNDX.L
1.1%
ICLN
35.4%

Basic Materials

CNDX.L
1.0%
ICLN
1.3%

Energy

CNDX.L
0.5%
ICLN
24.9%

Financial Services

CNDX.L
0.2%
ICLN

-

Real Estate

CNDX.L
0.1%
ICLN

-

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 Global Clean Energy ETF

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 ICLN:
ICLN vs. TANICLN vs. QCLNICLN vs. GRIDICLN vs. INRG.LICLN vs. PBWICLN vs. CNRGICLN vs. LIT

Return for Risk

CNDX.L vs. ICLN — 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: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
ICLN
ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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. ICLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). 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.LICLNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.17
2.17

+0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.03
2.73

+0.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.34

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.24

3.73

-0.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.35

13.84

-2.50

CNDX.L vs. ICLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is comparable to the ICLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNDX.L and ICLN, 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. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNDX.L drawdown since its inception was -35.21%, smaller than the maximum ICLN drawdown of -87.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNDX.L and ICLN.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CNDX.LICLNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.21%

-87.15%

+51.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-16.38%

+5.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.44%

-43.18%

+20.74%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.21%

-57.16%

+21.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.21%

-66.75%

+31.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.08%

-43.03%

+39.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.13%

-66.56%

+61.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.15%

4.41%

-1.26%

Volatility

CNDX.L vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) is 6.21%, while iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a volatility of 12.97%. This indicates that CNDX.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CNDX.LICLNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.21%

12.97%

-6.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.72%

22.62%

-9.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.44%

28.21%

-11.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.99%

27.55%

-6.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.12%

27.32%

-7.20%

CNDX.L vs. ICLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNDX.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than ICLN's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNDX.L vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison

CNDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%.

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%
ICLN
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF		1.28%1.63%1.85%1.59%0.89%1.18%0.34%1.36%2.77%2.49%3.88%2.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

CNDX.L and ICLN have a correlation of 0.47, 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 0.39% for ICLN.

CNDX.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while ICLN is Alternative Energy Equities. CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CNDX.L and 0.39% for ICLN.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNDX.L and ICLN

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