CNQQ vs. GDX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) and GDX (VanEck Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNQQ is a China Equities fund tracking the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while GDX is a Gold fund tracking the NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNQQ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.51%/yr for GDX.

Performance

CNQQ vs. GDX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNQQ achieves a 12.03% return, which is significantly higher than GDX's 0.73% return.

CNQQ

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 7.11%
• YTD: 12.03%
• 6M: 12.44%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GDX

• 1D: 1.65%
• 1M: 0.69%
• YTD: 0.73%
• 6M: 6.93%
• 1Y: 63.55%
• 3Y*: 41.54%
• 5Y*: 19.08%
• 10Y*: 14.11%

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

CNQQ vs. GDX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF	12.03%	-5.96%
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF	0.73%	15.68%

Correlation

The correlation between CNQQ and GDX is 0.44, 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	0.44

Return for Risk

CNQQ vs. GDX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

GDX

GDX Risk / Return Rank: 39
GDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
GDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
GDX Omega Ratio Rank: 40
GDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
GDX Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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.

CNQQ vs. GDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX). 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CNQQ	GDX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.40	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.53	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.38	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	0.13	+0.20

Drawdowns

CNQQ vs. GDX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNQQ drawdown since its inception was -17.82%, smaller than the maximum GDX drawdown of -80.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQQ and GDX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNQQ	GDX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.82%	-80.34%	+62.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-30.84%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-30.84%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-46.51%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-49.79%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.09%	-25.41%	+24.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.19%	-40.43%	+31.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	12.09%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CNQQ	GDX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	15.49%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	37.51%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.37%	45.49%	-21.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.37%	36.40%	-12.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.37%	37.17%	-12.80%

CNQQ vs. GDX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNQQ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GDX's 0.51% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNQQ vs. GDX - Dividend Comparison

CNQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, less than GDX's 0.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF	0.73%	0.74%	1.19%	1.61%	1.66%	1.67%	0.53%	0.67%	0.50%	0.76%	0.26%	0.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNQQ and GDX in my portfolio?

CNQQ and GDX have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNQQ or GDX?

On fees, GDX is cheaper at 0.51% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNQQ or GDX?

GDX is cheaper with a 0.51% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CNQQ or GDX?

GDX has the higher dividend yield at 0.73%, compared with 0.23% for CNQQ.

What is the main difference between CNQQ and GDX?

CNQQ is categorized as China Equities, while GDX is Gold. CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while GDX tracks NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNQQ and 0.51% for GDX.