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

Performance

CQQQ vs. CNXT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT). 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 3.44% return, which is significantly lower than CNXT's 24.01% return. Over the past 10 years, CQQQ has underperformed CNXT with an annualized return of 5.33%, while CNXT has yielded a comparatively higher 5.70% annualized return.


CQQQ

1D
-0.41%
1M
0.24%
6M
-6.27%
YTD
3.44%
1Y
20.14%
3Y*
9.89%
5Y*
-6.51%
10Y*
5.33%

CNXT

1D
-1.15%
1M
-5.99%
6M
17.62%
YTD
24.01%
1Y
82.60%
3Y*
23.91%
5Y*
2.34%
10Y*
5.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CQQQ vs. CNXT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CQQQ
Invesco China Technology ETF
3.44%34.96%9.84%-16.71%-30.09%-24.54%57.33%33.57%-34.77%74.31%
CNXT
VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF
24.01%59.31%12.42%-21.47%-35.58%8.78%63.30%42.66%-39.48%20.19%

Correlation

The correlation between CQQQ and CNXT 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

0.75

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

0.80

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

0.73

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

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2014

0.67

The correlation between CQQQ and CNXT shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (all time) to 0.80 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CQQQ vs. CNXT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CQQQ
CNXT

Technology

58.4%
44.3%

Communication Services

25.1%
0.9%

Consumer Cyclical

14.4%
0.6%

Industrials

1.5%
37.5%

Financial Services

0.6%
3.7%

Basic Materials

0.1%
4.9%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.4%

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

3.9%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

CQQQ
58.4%
CNXT
44.3%

Communication Services

CQQQ
25.1%
CNXT
0.9%

Consumer Cyclical

CQQQ
14.4%
CNXT
0.6%

Industrials

CQQQ
1.5%
CNXT
37.5%

Financial Services

CQQQ
0.6%
CNXT
3.7%

Basic Materials

CQQQ
0.1%
CNXT
4.9%

Consumer Defensive

CQQQ

-

CNXT
1.4%

Energy

CQQQ

-

CNXT

-

Healthcare

CQQQ

-

CNXT
3.9%

Real Estate

CQQQ

-

CNXT

-

Utilities

CQQQ

-

CNXT

-

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. CNXT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CQQQ
CQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
CQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
CQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
CQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
CQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

CNXT
CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
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. CNXT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


CQQQCNXTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.77

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.94

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.38

-0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.83

5.40

-4.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.86

17.72

-15.85

CQQQ vs. CNXT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CQQQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is lower than the CNXT Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CQQQ and CNXT, 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...

Drawdowns

CQQQ vs. CNXT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CQQQ drawdown since its inception was -73.99%, which is greater than CNXT's maximum drawdown of -68.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CQQQ and CNXT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CQQQCNXTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-73.99%

-68.98%

-5.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.41%

-15.37%

-9.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-35.93%

-48.60%

+12.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-64.11%

-61.21%

-2.90%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.99%

-63.30%

-10.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-48.69%

-13.03%

-35.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.42%

-42.59%

+14.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.84%

4.68%

+6.16%

Volatility

CQQQ vs. CNXT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) is 12.00%, while VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) has a volatility of 16.16%. This indicates that CQQQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNXT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CQQQCNXTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.00%

16.16%

-4.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.26%

25.43%

-1.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.85%

34.50%

-2.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

38.31%

35.89%

+2.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.48%

32.00%

+1.48%

CQQQ vs. CNXT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

CQQQ vs. CNXT - Dividend Comparison

CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.09%, more than CNXT's 0.15% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNXT
VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF
0.15%0.18%0.15%0.00%0.00%9.22%0.01%0.45%0.00%0.19%0.00%0.00%
CQQQ
Invesco China Technology ETF
2.09%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 CNXT 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.

CNXT has higher volatility (16.16%) compared to CQQQ (12.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CQQQ dropped -73.99% vs CNXT's -68.98%.

On 10-year performance, CNXT leads with 5.70% vs 5.33% for CQQQ. On fees, CNXT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, CQQQ has been the lower-risk option at 12.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CNXT has performed better with a 5.70% return vs 5.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

CQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.09%, compared with 0.15% for CNXT.

CQQQ tracks FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index, while CNXT tracks SME-ChiNext 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for CQQQ and 0.65% for CNXT.

CNXT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 0.64), 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 CNXT

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