PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CQQQ vs. ASHR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund (ASHR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CQQQ achieves a 2.46% return, which is significantly lower than ASHR's 10.11% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CQQQ having a 5.40% annualized return and ASHR not far behind at 5.38%.


CQQQ

1D
-1.50%
1M
4.43%
YTD
2.46%
6M
5.43%
1Y
32.76%
3Y*
10.55%
5Y*
-7.50%
10Y*
5.40%

ASHR

1D
-0.14%
1M
3.02%
YTD
10.11%
6M
13.67%
1Y
39.07%
3Y*
12.07%
5Y*
-1.24%
10Y*
5.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CQQQ
Invesco China Technology ETF
2.46%34.96%9.84%-16.71%-30.09%-24.54%57.33%33.57%-34.77%74.31%
ASHR
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund
10.11%27.02%11.95%-12.52%-27.52%-1.57%36.29%36.50%-28.45%33.47%

Correlation

The correlation between CQQQ and ASHR is 0.74, 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

0.74

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

0.78

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

0.76

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2013

0.70

The correlation between CQQQ and ASHR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CQQQ
ASHR

Technology

58.2%
26.3%

Communication Services

21.9%
0.8%

Consumer Cyclical

13.8%
6.7%

Industrials

1.3%
16.7%

Financial Services

0.1%
20.4%

Basic Materials

0.1%
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

-

7.3%

Energy

-

2.7%

Healthcare

-

4.9%

Real Estate

-

0.5%

Utilities

-

3.0%

Technology

CQQQ
58.2%
ASHR
26.3%

Communication Services

CQQQ
21.9%
ASHR
0.8%

Consumer Cyclical

CQQQ
13.8%
ASHR
6.7%

Industrials

CQQQ
1.3%
ASHR
16.7%

Financial Services

CQQQ
0.1%
ASHR
20.4%

Basic Materials

CQQQ
0.1%
ASHR
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

CQQQ

-

ASHR
7.3%

Energy

CQQQ

-

ASHR
2.7%

Healthcare

CQQQ

-

ASHR
4.9%

Real Estate

CQQQ

-

ASHR
0.5%

Utilities

CQQQ

-

ASHR
3.0%

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

CQQQ vs. ASHR — Risk / Return Rank

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

CQQQ
CQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
CQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
CQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
CQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
CQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

ASHR
ASHR Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
ASHR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASHR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASHR Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ASHR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASHR Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund (ASHR). 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.


CQQQASHRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.41

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.35

5.10

-3.75

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.16

15.76

-12.60

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CQQQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.11, which is lower than the ASHR Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CQQQ and ASHR, 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


CQQQASHRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.11

2.33

-1.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.20

-0.05

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.16

0.22

-0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.19

0.23

-0.04

Drawdowns

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CQQQ drawdown since its inception was -73.99%, which is greater than ASHR's maximum drawdown of -51.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CQQQ and ASHR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CQQQASHRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-73.99%

-51.30%

-22.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.41%

-7.69%

-16.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-35.93%

-33.12%

-2.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-66.96%

-45.76%

-21.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.99%

-51.30%

-22.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-49.18%

-15.63%

-33.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.29%

-29.18%

+0.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.39%

2.49%

+7.90%

Volatility

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Volatility Comparison

Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a higher volatility of 11.60% compared to Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund (ASHR) at 5.87%. This indicates that CQQQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASHR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CQQQASHRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.60%

5.87%

+5.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.88%

11.53%

+10.35%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.78%

16.84%

+12.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

38.02%

23.89%

+14.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.30%

24.06%

+9.24%

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CQQQ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than ASHR's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

CQQQ vs. ASHR - Dividend Comparison

CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, which matches ASHR's 2.10% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASHR
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund
2.10%2.31%1.13%2.48%1.13%0.88%0.81%0.98%1.32%0.84%0.73%30.13%
CQQQ
Invesco China Technology ETF
2.11%2.17%0.28%0.55%0.08%0.00%0.47%0.01%0.43%1.41%1.69%1.77%

Frequently Asked Questions


CQQQ and ASHR have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CQQQ has higher volatility (11.60%) compared to ASHR (5.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CQQQ dropped -73.99% vs ASHR's -51.30%.

On 10-year performance, CQQQ leads with 5.40% vs 5.38% for ASHR. On fees, ASHR is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASHR has been the lower-risk option at 5.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CQQQ has performed better with a 5.40% return vs 5.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ASHR is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for CQQQ.

CQQQ and ASHR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 2.11%.

CQQQ tracks AlphaShares China Technology Index, while ASHR tracks CSI 300 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for CQQQ and 0.65% for ASHR.

ASHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 1.11), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CQQQ and ASHR

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