CNXT vs. PGJ

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CNXT (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF) and PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) are both China Equities funds - CNXT tracks the SME-ChiNext 100 Index while PGJ tracks the Halter USX China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNXT returned 6.57%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for PGJ. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNXT charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for PGJ.

Performance

CNXT vs. PGJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) and Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNXT achieves a 32.68% return, which is significantly higher than PGJ's -11.48% return. Over the past 10 years, CNXT has outperformed PGJ with an annualized return of 6.57%, while PGJ has yielded a comparatively lower 0.21% annualized return.

CNXT

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 9.11%
• YTD: 32.68%
• 6M: 39.36%
• 1Y: 114.61%
• 3Y*: 26.75%
• 5Y*: 3.96%
• 10Y*: 6.57%

PGJ

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: -4.23%
• YTD: -11.48%
• 6M: -13.73%
• 1Y: -7.05%
• 3Y*: 2.92%
• 5Y*: -13.73%
• 10Y*: 0.21%

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

CNXT vs. PGJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	32.68%	59.31%	12.42%	-21.47%	-35.58%	8.78%	63.30%	42.66%	-39.48%	20.19%
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	-11.48%	13.66%	5.91%	-2.38%	-24.50%	-42.87%	54.24%	32.18%	-29.51%	60.27%

Correlation

The correlation between CNXT and PGJ 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2014	0.51

The correlation between CNXT and PGJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNXT vs. PGJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNXT	PGJ
Technology	43.8%	16.2%
Industrials	33.2%	6.5%
Healthcare	7.0%	0.8%
Financial Services	5.6%	3.6%
Basic Materials	4.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	7.6%
Communication Services	2.5%	14.5%
Consumer Cyclical	1.2%	44.8%
Energy	-	2.3%
Real Estate	-	3.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CNXT vs. PGJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNXT

CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 93
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 89
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 95

PGJ

PGJ Risk / Return Rank: 6
PGJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Omega Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

CNXT vs. PGJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) and Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ). 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.

	CNXT	PGJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.75	-0.29	+4.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.40	-0.26	+4.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	0.97	+0.58
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.44	-0.28	+9.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	28.91	-0.52	+29.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNXT vs. PGJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNXT Sharpe Ratio is 3.75, which is higher than the PGJ Sharpe Ratio of -0.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNXT and PGJ, 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

	CNXT	PGJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.75	-0.29	+4.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.11	-0.32	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.21	0.01	+0.20
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.22	0.12	+0.11

Drawdowns

CNXT vs. PGJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNXT drawdown since its inception was -68.98%, smaller than the maximum PGJ drawdown of -78.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNXT and PGJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNXT	PGJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.98%	-78.37%	+9.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.21%	-25.69%	+13.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.60%	-30.82%	-17.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-61.21%	-70.00%	+8.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-63.30%	-78.37%	+15.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.76%	-66.25%	+63.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.93%	-31.74%	-11.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.98%	13.49%	-9.51%

Volatility

CNXT vs. PGJ - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) has a higher volatility of 10.30% compared to Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) at 8.54%. This indicates that CNXT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PGJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNXT	PGJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.30%	8.54%	+1.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.99%	17.28%	+2.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.73%	24.46%	+6.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.26%	43.73%	-8.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.64%	36.69%	-5.05%

CNXT vs. PGJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNXT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than PGJ's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNXT vs. PGJ - Dividend Comparison

CNXT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.14%, less than PGJ's 3.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	0.14%	0.18%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	9.22%	0.01%	0.45%	0.00%	0.19%	0.00%	0.00%
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	3.58%	3.38%	4.70%	2.50%	0.84%	0.00%	0.30%	0.17%	0.31%	2.05%	1.94%	0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNXT and PGJ in my portfolio?

CNXT and PGJ 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.

Which is riskier, CNXT or PGJ?

CNXT has higher volatility (10.30%) compared to PGJ (8.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNXT dropped -68.98% vs PGJ's -78.37%.

Which ETF is better, CNXT or PGJ?

On 10-year performance, CNXT leads with 6.57% vs 0.21% for PGJ. On fees, CNXT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, PGJ has been the lower-risk option at 8.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNXT or PGJ?

Over the 10-year period, CNXT has performed better with a 6.57% return vs 0.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNXT or PGJ?

CNXT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for PGJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CNXT or PGJ?

PGJ has the higher dividend yield at 3.58%, compared with 0.14% for CNXT.

What is the main difference between CNXT and PGJ?

CNXT tracks SME-ChiNext 100 Index, while PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CNXT and 0.70% for PGJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNXT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.75 vs -0.29), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.