PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and RBOT.TO (Global X Robotics & AI Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNX1.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while RBOT.TO is a Robotics fund tracking the Indxx Global Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNX1.L returned 18.83%/yr vs -0.54%/yr for RBOT.TO. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNX1.L charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for RBOT.TO.

Performance

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO - 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 Global X Robotics & AI Index ETF (RBOT.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CNX1.L is traded in GBp, while RBOT.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the RBOT.TO values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNX1.L achieves a 19.85% return, which is significantly higher than RBOT.TO's 8.84% 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%

RBOT.TO

1D
-0.03%
1M
2.29%
YTD
8.84%
6M
8.28%
1Y
24.84%
3Y*
6.56%
5Y*
-0.54%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%1.77%
RBOT.TO
Global X Robotics & AI Index ETF		8.79%5.55%6.01%32.91%-41.52%9.89%46.71%29.75%-28.12%-0.07%

Correlation

The correlation between CNX1.L and RBOT.TO is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.48

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.49

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2017

0.54

The correlation between CNX1.L and RBOT.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CNX1.L
RBOT.TO

Technology

57.3%
29.4%

Communication Services

14.5%
5.2%

Consumer Cyclical

11.6%
7.0%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%

-

Healthcare

3.8%
9.4%

Industrials

2.8%
49.0%

Utilities

1.3%

-

Basic Materials

1.1%

-

Energy

0.5%
0.5%

Financial Services

0.2%
1.0%

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Technology

CNX1.L
57.3%
RBOT.TO
29.4%

Communication Services

CNX1.L
14.5%
RBOT.TO
5.2%

Consumer Cyclical

CNX1.L
11.6%
RBOT.TO
7.0%

Consumer Defensive

CNX1.L
6.9%
RBOT.TO

-

Healthcare

CNX1.L
3.8%
RBOT.TO
9.4%

Industrials

CNX1.L
2.8%
RBOT.TO
49.0%

Utilities

CNX1.L
1.3%
RBOT.TO

-

Basic Materials

CNX1.L
1.1%
RBOT.TO

-

Energy

CNX1.L
0.5%
RBOT.TO
0.5%

Financial Services

CNX1.L
0.2%
RBOT.TO
1.0%

Real Estate

CNX1.L
0.1%
RBOT.TO

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

Global X Robotics & AI Index ETF

Often compared with CNX1.L:
CNX1.L vs. CNDX.LCNX1.L vs. EQQQ.LCNX1.L vs. IITU.LCNX1.L vs. EQGB.LCNX1.L vs. QQQCNX1.L vs. XNAQ.LCNX1.L vs. SXRV.DE
Often compared with RBOT.TO:
RBOT.TO vs. XAIXRBOT.TO vs. ROBORBOT.TO vs. RBTX.LRBOT.TO vs. AIQRBOT.TO vs. AIGO.TORBOT.TO vs. FBOTRBOT.TO vs. LSMC.DE

Return for Risk

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO — 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: 7878
Overall Rank
CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
RBOT.TO
RBOT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
RBOT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RBOT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
RBOT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
RBOT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
RBOT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
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. RBOT.TO - 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 Global X Robotics & AI Index ETF (RBOT.TO). 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.LRBOT.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.82
1.10

+1.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.72
1.63

+2.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.20

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.76

1.39

+2.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.10

4.43

+6.67

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. RBOT.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is higher than the RBOT.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNX1.L and RBOT.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CNX1.LRBOT.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.82

1.10

+1.72

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.98

-0.02

+1.00

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

0.16

+0.98

Drawdowns

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNX1.L drawdown since its inception was -27.56%, smaller than the maximum RBOT.TO drawdown of -53.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNX1.L and RBOT.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CNX1.LRBOT.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.56%

-53.43%

+25.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.03%

-17.93%

+6.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.56%

-31.80%

+7.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.56%

-53.43%

+25.87%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.56%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.63%

-16.35%

+15.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.57%

-22.40%

+17.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.75%

5.62%

-1.87%

Volatility

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) is 4.13%, while Global X Robotics & AI Index ETF (RBOT.TO) has a volatility of 7.84%. This indicates that CNX1.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RBOT.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CNX1.LRBOT.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.13%

7.84%

-3.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.38%

17.08%

-6.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.70%

22.73%

-8.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.16%

25.95%

-6.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.44%

26.12%

-6.68%

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNX1.L has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than RBOT.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNX1.L vs. RBOT.TO - Dividend Comparison

CNX1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RBOT.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
CNX1.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RBOT.TO
Global X Robotics & AI Index ETF		0.12%0.14%0.85%0.11%0.52%0.04%0.17%0.67%0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

CNX1.L and RBOT.TO have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CNX1.L is cheaper at 0.36% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CNX1.L is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for RBOT.TO.

CNX1.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while RBOT.TO is Robotics. CNX1.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while RBOT.TO tracks Indxx Global Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for CNX1.L and 0.65% for RBOT.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNX1.L and RBOT.TO

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