CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and IUSF.L (iShares Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNX1.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while IUSF.L is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell Mid Cap TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNX1.L returned 18.83%/yr vs 7.45%/yr for IUSF.L. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNX1.L charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for IUSF.L.

Performance

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) and iShares Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF (IUSF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNX1.L achieves a 19.85% return, which is significantly higher than IUSF.L's 7.69% return.

CNX1.L

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 8.17%
• YTD: 19.85%
• 6M: 17.68%
• 1Y: 40.87%
• 3Y*: 24.68%
• 5Y*: 18.83%
• 10Y*: 22.43%

IUSF.L

• 1D: 0.64%
• 1M: 3.50%
• YTD: 7.69%
• 6M: 6.92%
• 1Y: 18.15%
• 3Y*: 11.63%
• 5Y*: 7.45%
• 10Y*: —

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

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNX1.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	19.85%	11.57%	28.51%	47.71%	-25.53%	29.50%	43.24%	33.63%	4.62%	20.13%
IUSF.L iShares Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF	7.69%	1.00%	14.60%	10.79%	-8.57%	27.74%	13.62%	23.94%	-5.85%	7.91%

Correlation

The correlation between CNX1.L and IUSF.L is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.52
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 18, 2016	0.71

The correlation between CNX1.L and IUSF.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNX1.L	IUSF.L
Technology	57.3%	21.2%
Communication Services	14.5%	3.9%
Consumer Cyclical	11.6%	9.9%
Consumer Defensive	6.9%	5.7%
Healthcare	3.8%	9.3%
Industrials	2.8%	16.5%
Utilities	1.3%	6.3%
Basic Materials	1.1%	5.3%
Energy	0.5%	2.3%
Financial Services	0.2%	12.4%
Real Estate	0.1%	7.1%

Return for Risk

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNX1.L

CNX1.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CNX1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CNX1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CNX1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
CNX1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 62

IUSF.L

IUSF.L Risk / Return Rank: 46
IUSF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
IUSF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
IUSF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 43
IUSF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
IUSF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) and iShares Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF (IUSF.L). 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.

	CNX1.L	IUSF.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.82	1.59	+1.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.72	2.21	+1.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.28	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.76	2.41	+1.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.10	7.40	+3.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is higher than the IUSF.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNX1.L and IUSF.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CNX1.L	IUSF.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.82	1.59	+1.24
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98	0.47	+0.52
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	1.16	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.14	0.56	+0.59

Drawdowns

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNX1.L drawdown since its inception was -27.56%, smaller than the maximum IUSF.L drawdown of -33.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNX1.L and IUSF.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNX1.L	IUSF.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.56%	-33.67%	+6.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.03%	-7.39%	-3.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.56%	-22.73%	-1.83%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.56%	-22.73%	-4.83%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.56%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.63%	0.00%	-0.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.57%	-5.45%	+0.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.75%	2.41%	+1.34%

Volatility

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) has a higher volatility of 4.13% compared to iShares Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF (IUSF.L) at 2.67%. This indicates that CNX1.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IUSF.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNX1.L	IUSF.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.13%	2.67%	+1.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.38%	7.66%	+2.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.70%	11.24%	+3.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.16%	15.95%	+3.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.44%	17.36%	+2.08%

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNX1.L has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than IUSF.L's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNX1.L vs. IUSF.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNX1.L nor IUSF.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNX1.L and IUSF.L in my portfolio?

CNX1.L and IUSF.L have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNX1.L or IUSF.L?

On fees, IUSF.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNX1.L or IUSF.L?

IUSF.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for CNX1.L.

What is the main difference between CNX1.L and IUSF.L?

CNX1.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while IUSF.L is Mid Cap Blend Equities. CNX1.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while IUSF.L tracks Russell Mid Cap TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for CNX1.L and 0.20% for IUSF.L.