CNQQ vs. SLVP

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) and SLVP (iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNQQ is a China Equities fund tracking the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while SLVP is a Silver fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Silver Miners Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CNQQ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for SLVP.

Performance

CNQQ vs. SLVP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ) and iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF (SLVP). 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 SLVP's 2.45% return.

CNQQ

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

SLVP

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 2.12%
• YTD: 2.45%
• 6M: 14.44%
• 1Y: 109.88%
• 3Y*: 51.92%
• 5Y*: 16.01%
• 10Y*: 13.62%

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

CNQQ vs. SLVP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF	12.03%	-5.96%
SLVP iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF	2.45%	29.98%

Correlation

The correlation between CNQQ and SLVP is 0.46, 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	0.46

Return for Risk

CNQQ vs. SLVP — Risk / Return Rank

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

SLVP

SLVP Risk / Return Rank: 57
SLVP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
SLVP Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
SLVP Omega Ratio Rank: 53
SLVP Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
SLVP Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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. SLVP - 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 Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF (SLVP). 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	SLVP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.08	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.38	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.32	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	0.09	+0.24

Drawdowns

CNQQ vs. SLVP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNQQ drawdown since its inception was -17.82%, smaller than the maximum SLVP drawdown of -80.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQQ and SLVP.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNQQ	SLVP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.82%	-80.47%	+62.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-33.57%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-33.57%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-54.78%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-62.03%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.09%	-26.10%	+25.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.19%	-46.81%	+37.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	13.28%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CNQQ	SLVP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	17.58%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	43.21%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.37%	53.05%	-28.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.37%	42.75%	-18.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.37%	42.24%	-17.87%

CNQQ vs. SLVP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNQQ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than SLVP's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNQQ vs. SLVP - Dividend Comparison

CNQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, less than SLVP's 1.74% 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%
SLVP iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF	1.74%	1.78%	1.05%	0.88%	0.63%	1.63%	2.39%	2.03%	1.28%	0.85%	2.32%	0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNQQ and SLVP in my portfolio?

CNQQ and SLVP have a correlation of 0.46, 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 SLVP?

On fees, SLVP is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNQQ or SLVP?

SLVP is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.

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

SLVP has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 0.23% for CNQQ.

What is the main difference between CNQQ and SLVP?

CNQQ is categorized as China Equities, while SLVP is Silver. CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech, while SLVP tracks MSCI ACWI Select Silver Miners Investable Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNQQ and 0.39% for SLVP.