CNQQ vs. GXC
CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) and GXC (SPDR S&P China ETF) are both China Equities funds - CNQQ tracks the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech while GXC tracks the S&P China BMI Index. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CNQQ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for GXC.
Performance
CNQQ vs. GXC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNQQ achieves a 13.99% return, which is significantly higher than GXC's -6.50% return.
CNQQ
- 1D
- 0.95%
- 1M
- 4.74%
- YTD
- 13.99%
- 6M
- 13.47%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GXC
- 1D
- 0.75%
- 1M
- -2.98%
- YTD
- -6.50%
- 6M
- -8.11%
- 1Y
- 8.50%
- 3Y*
- 10.33%
- 5Y*
- -4.63%
- 10Y*
- 5.28%
CNQQ vs. GXC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 13.99% | -5.22% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | -6.50% | -5.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNQQ and GXC is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2025 | 0.82 |
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. GXC — Risk / Return Rank
CNQQ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GXC
CNQQ vs. GXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC). 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 | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.09 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 0.58 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 1.26 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNQQ vs. GXC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNQQ drawdown since its inception was -17.82%, smaller than the maximum GXC drawdown of -71.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQQ and GXC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNQQ | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.82% | -71.96% | +54.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -14.63% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -25.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -53.99% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -60.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -33.92% | +33.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.84% | -28.83% | +19.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 6.77% | — |
Volatility
CNQQ vs. GXC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNQQ | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.75% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.95% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.06% | 19.01% | +6.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.06% | 29.00% | -3.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.06% | 26.09% | -1.03% |
CNQQ vs. GXC - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNQQ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GXC's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNQQ vs. GXC - Dividend Comparison
CNQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.22%, less than GXC's 3.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 0.22% | 0.09% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | 3.33% | 2.40% | 2.81% | 3.70% | 2.67% | 1.35% | 1.04% | 1.60% | 2.03% | 1.84% | 2.05% | 2.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNQQ and GXC have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GXC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GXC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.
GXC has the higher dividend yield at 3.33%, compared with 0.22% for CNQQ.
CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while GXC tracks S&P China BMI Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNQQ and 0.59% for GXC.
Find the right allocation for CNQQ and GXC
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