CNQQ vs. ECNS
CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) and ECNS (iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF) are both China Equities funds - CNQQ tracks the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech while ECNS tracks the MSCI China Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNQQ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ECNS.
Performance
CNQQ vs. ECNS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNQQ achieves a 10.89% return, which is significantly higher than ECNS's -11.09% return.
CNQQ
- 1D
- -2.87%
- 1M
- 4.30%
- 6M
- 7.12%
- YTD
- 10.89%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ECNS
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- -5.05%
- 6M
- -15.24%
- YTD
- -11.09%
- 1Y
- -6.50%
- 3Y*
- 4.84%
- 5Y*
- -8.01%
- 10Y*
- 0.97%
CNQQ vs. ECNS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 10.89% | -5.22% |
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | -11.09% | -10.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNQQ and ECNS is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2025 | 0.62 |
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. ECNS — Risk / Return Rank
CNQQ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ECNS
CNQQ vs. ECNS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). 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.
| CNQQ | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 0.96 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.25 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -0.55 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNQQ vs. ECNS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNQQ drawdown since its inception was -17.82%, smaller than the maximum ECNS drawdown of -63.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQQ and ECNS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNQQ | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.82% | -63.43% | +45.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -25.28% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -31.72% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -58.45% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -63.43% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.94% | -42.76% | +38.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.47% | -29.46% | +20.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 11.53% | — |
Volatility
CNQQ vs. ECNS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNQQ | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.66% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.70% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.76% | 20.81% | +5.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.76% | 29.43% | -2.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.76% | 25.78% | +0.98% |
CNQQ vs. ECNS - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNQQ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ECNS's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNQQ vs. ECNS - Dividend Comparison
CNQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%, less than ECNS's 6.62% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 0.34% | 0.09% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | 6.62% | 6.20% | 5.98% | 4.89% | 3.54% | 4.87% | 3.59% | 3.23% | 6.16% | 3.18% | 4.29% | 3.58% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNQQ and ECNS have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ECNS is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ECNS is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.
ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.62%, compared with 0.34% for CNQQ.
CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while ECNS tracks MSCI China Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNQQ and 0.59% for ECNS.
Find the right allocation for CNQQ and ECNS
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