CNQQ vs. RWLC
CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) and RWLC (Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNQQ is a China Equities fund tracking the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while RWLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNQQ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for RWLC.
Performance
CNQQ vs. RWLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNQQ achieves a 10.89% return, which is significantly lower than RWLC's 13.61% return.
CNQQ
- 1D
- -2.87%
- 1M
- 4.30%
- 6M
- 7.12%
- YTD
- 10.89%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RWLC
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 3.19%
- 6M
- 12.70%
- YTD
- 13.61%
- 1Y
- 20.54%
- 3Y*
- 23.38%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CNQQ vs. RWLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 10.89% | -5.22% |
RWLC Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF | 13.61% | 1.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNQQ and RWLC is 0.51, 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 | 0.51 |
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. RWLC — Risk / Return Rank
CNQQ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
RWLC
CNQQ vs. RWLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF (RWLC). 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 | RWLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.25 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.14 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.70 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNQQ vs. RWLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNQQ drawdown since its inception was -17.82%, smaller than the maximum RWLC drawdown of -21.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQQ and RWLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNQQ | RWLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.82% | -21.00% | +3.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -9.33% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.20% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.94% | -0.01% | -3.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.47% | -5.35% | -3.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.59% | — |
Volatility
CNQQ vs. RWLC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNQQ | RWLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.75% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 10.15% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.76% | 14.62% | +12.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.76% | 16.50% | +10.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.76% | 16.50% | +10.26% |
CNQQ vs. RWLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNQQ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than RWLC's 0.32% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNQQ vs. RWLC - Dividend Comparison
CNQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%, less than RWLC's 12.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 0.34% | 0.09% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RWLC Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF | 12.93% | 14.69% | 0.98% | 1.63% | 1.39% | 0.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNQQ and RWLC have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RWLC is cheaper at 0.32% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RWLC is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.
RWLC has the higher dividend yield at 12.93%, compared with 0.34% for CNQQ.
CNQQ is categorized as China Equities, while RWLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while RWLC tracks S&P 500. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNQQ and 0.32% for RWLC.
Find the right allocation for CNQQ and RWLC
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