CNQQ vs. CIBR
CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) and CIBR (First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNQQ is a China Equities fund tracking the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while CIBR is a Cybersecurity fund tracking the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNQQ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CIBR.
Performance
CNQQ vs. CIBR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNQQ achieves a 12.03% return, which is significantly lower than CIBR's 27.16% return.
CNQQ
- 1D
- 0.38%
- 1M
- 7.11%
- YTD
- 12.03%
- 6M
- 12.44%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CIBR
- 1D
- -1.06%
- 1M
- 27.98%
- YTD
- 27.16%
- 6M
- 21.95%
- 1Y
- 25.06%
- 3Y*
- 27.82%
- 5Y*
- 16.03%
- 10Y*
- 18.34%
CNQQ vs. CIBR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 12.03% | -5.96% |
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | 27.16% | -5.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNQQ and CIBR is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2025 | 0.21 |
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
CNQQ vs. CIBR — Risk / Return Rank
CNQQ
CIBR
CNQQ vs. CIBR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CNQQ | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 1.03 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.65 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.78 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 0.66 | -0.33 |
Drawdowns
CNQQ vs. CIBR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNQQ drawdown since its inception was -17.82%, smaller than the maximum CIBR drawdown of -33.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQQ and CIBR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNQQ | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.82% | -33.89% | +16.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -21.99% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -21.99% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -33.89% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.09% | -3.84% | +2.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.19% | -8.66% | -0.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 9.26% | — |
Volatility
CNQQ vs. CIBR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNQQ | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 11.15% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 20.93% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.37% | 24.50% | -0.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.37% | 24.95% | -0.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.37% | 23.59% | +0.78% |
CNQQ vs. CIBR - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNQQ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CIBR's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNQQ vs. CIBR - Dividend Comparison
CNQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, less than CIBR's 0.45% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | 0.45% | 0.42% | 0.29% | 0.42% | 0.31% | 0.59% | 1.10% | 0.23% | 0.23% | 0.10% | 0.77% | 0.58% |
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 0.23% | 0.09% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNQQ and CIBR have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CIBR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CIBR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.
CIBR has the higher dividend yield at 0.45%, compared with 0.23% for CNQQ.
CNQQ is categorized as China Equities, while CIBR is Cybersecurity. CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while CIBR tracks Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNQQ and 0.60% for CIBR.
Find the right allocation for CNQQ and CIBR
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