PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CNDX.L vs. SCHG

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNDX.L returned 21.60%/yr vs 18.50%/yr for SCHG. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNDX.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.

Performance

CNDX.L vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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 higher than SCHG's 2.58% return. Over the past 10 years, CNDX.L has outperformed SCHG with an annualized return of 21.60%, while SCHG has yielded a comparatively lower 18.50% annualized return.

CNDX.L

1D
3.01%
1M
1.60%
YTD
16.86%
6M
18.12%
1Y
35.84%
3Y*
26.24%
5Y*
16.67%
10Y*
21.60%

SCHG

1D
0.12%
1M
-2.62%
YTD
2.58%
6M
2.96%
1Y
18.71%
3Y*
22.68%
5Y*
14.33%
10Y*
18.50%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNDX.L vs. SCHG - 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%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF		2.58%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%39.14%36.02%-1.36%28.05%

Correlation

The correlation between CNDX.L and SCHG is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.71

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

0.61

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

0.61

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

0.60

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

0.57

The correlation between CNDX.L and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (all time) to 0.71 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CNDX.L vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CNDX.L
SCHG

Technology

57.9%
46.3%

Communication Services

14.5%
16.0%

Consumer Cyclical

11.6%
12.7%

Consumer Defensive

6.6%
1.7%

Healthcare

3.7%
7.7%

Industrials

2.8%
5.8%

Utilities

1.2%
0.4%

Basic Materials

1.0%
1.4%

Energy

0.5%
0.8%

Financial Services

0.2%
6.7%

Real Estate

0.1%
0.5%

Technology

CNDX.L
57.9%
SCHG
46.3%

Communication Services

CNDX.L
14.5%
SCHG
16.0%

Consumer Cyclical

CNDX.L
11.6%
SCHG
12.7%

Consumer Defensive

CNDX.L
6.6%
SCHG
1.7%

Healthcare

CNDX.L
3.7%
SCHG
7.7%

Industrials

CNDX.L
2.8%
SCHG
5.8%

Utilities

CNDX.L
1.2%
SCHG
0.4%

Basic Materials

CNDX.L
1.0%
SCHG
1.4%

Energy

CNDX.L
0.5%
SCHG
0.8%

Financial Services

CNDX.L
0.2%
SCHG
6.7%

Real Estate

CNDX.L
0.1%
SCHG
0.5%

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

Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth 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 SCHG:
SCHG vs. SCHDSCHG vs. QQQMSCHG vs. VOOSCHG vs. VUGSCHG vs. QQQSCHG vs. SPMOSCHG vs. SPYG

Return for Risk

CNDX.L vs. SCHG — 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
SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 3333
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
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. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.LSCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.17
1.18

+0.99

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.03
1.64

+1.40

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.21

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.24

1.14

+2.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.35

3.78

+7.57

CNDX.L vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is higher than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNDX.L and SCHG, 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. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNDX.L drawdown since its inception was -35.21%, roughly equal to the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNDX.L and SCHG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CNDX.LSCHGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.21%

-34.59%

-0.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-16.41%

+5.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.44%

-23.39%

+0.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.21%

-34.59%

-0.62%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.21%

-34.59%

-0.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.08%

-5.33%

+2.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.13%

-5.20%

+0.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.15%

4.96%

-1.81%

Volatility

CNDX.L vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a higher volatility of 6.21% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 5.14%. This indicates that CNDX.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CNDX.LSCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.21%

5.14%

+1.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.72%

12.30%

+0.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.44%

15.95%

+0.49%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.99%

22.33%

-1.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.12%

21.58%

-1.46%

CNDX.L vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNDX.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNDX.L vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

CNDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%.

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%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF		0.38%0.36%0.39%0.46%0.55%0.42%0.52%0.82%1.27%1.01%1.04%1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

CNDX.L and SCHG have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

CNDX.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CNDX.L and 0.04% for SCHG.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNDX.L and SCHG

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