CNDX.L vs. XNAS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) and XNAS.L (Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, from iShares and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNDX.L returned 27.98%/yr vs 28.10%/yr for XNAS.L. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. CNDX.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XNAS.L.

Performance

CNDX.L vs. XNAS.L - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CNDX.L having a 19.65% return and XNAS.L slightly higher at 19.67%.

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%

XNAS.L

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 6.81%
• YTD: 19.67%
• 6M: 18.60%
• 1Y: 39.30%
• 3Y*: 28.10%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	19.65%	19.75%	26.45%	56.31%	-1.80%
XNAS.L Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	19.67%	19.83%	26.60%	56.41%	-1.82%

Correlation

The correlation between CNDX.L and XNAS.L is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.99
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.99
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2022	0.99

The correlation between CNDX.L and XNAS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	CNDX.L	XNAS.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%

Return for Risk

CNDX.L vs. XNAS.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: 75
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 74
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

XNAS.L

XNAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 76
XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
XNAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
XNAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
XNAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
XNAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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. XNAS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.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.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.54	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.50	3.51	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.44	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.61	3.67	-0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.03	13.19	-0.15
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. XNAS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNDX.L and XNAS.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CNDX.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.52	2.54	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84	—	—
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	1.69	-0.57

Drawdowns

CNDX.L vs. XNAS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNDX.L drawdown since its inception was -35.17%, which is greater than XNAS.L's maximum drawdown of -22.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNDX.L and XNAS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNDX.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.17%	-22.92%	-12.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.00%	-10.91%	-0.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.44%	-22.92%	+0.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.17%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.17%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.76%	-0.76%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.30%	-3.03%	-2.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.07%	3.05%	+0.02%

Volatility

CNDX.L vs. XNAS.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) and Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L) have volatilities of 4.90% and 4.96%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNDX.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.90%	4.96%	-0.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.88%	11.72%	+0.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.79%	15.78%	+0.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.87%	19.39%	+1.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.07%	19.39%	+0.68%

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

CNDX.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than XNAS.L's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNDX.L vs. XNAS.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
XNAS.L Xtrackers 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%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNDX.L and XNAS.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.99, CNDX.L and XNAS.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, CNDX.L or XNAS.L?

On fees, XNAS.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNDX.L or XNAS.L?

XNAS.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

What is the main difference between CNDX.L and XNAS.L?

Both ETFs track NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CNDX.L and 0.20% for XNAS.L.