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

Performance

CQQQ vs. EFA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA). 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 -1.35% return, which is significantly lower than EFA's 9.36% return. Over the past 10 years, CQQQ has underperformed EFA with an annualized return of 5.36%, while EFA has yielded a comparatively higher 9.84% annualized return.


CQQQ

1D
-1.27%
1M
-8.85%
YTD
-1.35%
6M
-0.24%
1Y
21.23%
3Y*
8.01%
5Y*
-8.12%
10Y*
5.36%

EFA

1D
0.28%
1M
1.15%
YTD
9.36%
6M
10.80%
1Y
20.34%
3Y*
16.14%
5Y*
8.36%
10Y*
9.84%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CQQQ vs. EFA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CQQQ
Invesco China Technology ETF
-1.35%34.96%9.84%-16.71%-30.09%-24.54%57.33%33.57%-34.77%74.31%
EFA
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF
9.36%31.55%3.49%18.36%-14.39%11.45%7.60%22.04%-13.82%25.07%

Correlation

The correlation between CQQQ and EFA is 0.53, 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

0.53

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

0.48

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

0.49

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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 8, 2009

0.57

The correlation between CQQQ and EFA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

CQQQ vs. EFA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CQQQ
EFA

Technology

58.2%
10.4%

Communication Services

21.9%
4.5%

Consumer Cyclical

13.8%
7.6%

Industrials

1.3%
19.9%

Financial Services

0.1%
24.6%

Basic Materials

0.1%
5.9%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.7%

Energy

-

4.0%

Healthcare

-

10.6%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Utilities

-

4.0%

Technology

CQQQ
58.2%
EFA
10.4%

Communication Services

CQQQ
21.9%
EFA
4.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CQQQ
13.8%
EFA
7.6%

Industrials

CQQQ
1.3%
EFA
19.9%

Financial Services

CQQQ
0.1%
EFA
24.6%

Basic Materials

CQQQ
0.1%
EFA
5.9%

Consumer Defensive

CQQQ

-

EFA
6.7%

Energy

CQQQ

-

EFA
4.0%

Healthcare

CQQQ

-

EFA
10.6%

Real Estate

CQQQ

-

EFA
1.9%

Utilities

CQQQ

-

EFA
4.0%

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. EFA — 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: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
CQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
CQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
CQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

EFA
EFA Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
EFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFA Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
EFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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. EFA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA). 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.


CQQQEFADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.60

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.24

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.87

1.79

-0.91

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.01

6.67

-4.66

CQQQ vs. EFA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CQQQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the EFA Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CQQQ and EFA, 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. EFA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CQQQ drawdown since its inception was -73.99%, which is greater than EFA's maximum drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CQQQ and EFA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CQQQEFADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-73.99%

-61.04%

-12.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.41%

-11.42%

-12.99%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-35.93%

-14.05%

-21.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-66.96%

-29.53%

-37.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.99%

-34.19%

-39.80%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-51.07%

-0.61%

-50.46%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.32%

-11.92%

-16.40%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.60%

3.07%

+7.53%

Volatility

CQQQ vs. EFA - Volatility Comparison

Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a higher volatility of 10.63% compared to iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) at 5.50%. This indicates that CQQQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CQQQEFADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.63%

5.50%

+5.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.55%

13.19%

+9.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

30.20%

15.64%

+14.56%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

38.09%

16.58%

+21.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.33%

17.27%

+16.06%

CQQQ vs. EFA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CQQQ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than EFA's 0.32% expense ratio.


Dividends

CQQQ vs. EFA - Dividend Comparison

CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.20%, less than EFA's 3.09% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CQQQ
Invesco China Technology ETF
2.20%2.17%0.28%0.55%0.08%0.00%0.47%0.01%0.43%1.41%1.69%1.77%
EFA
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF
3.09%3.38%3.24%2.98%2.69%3.33%2.13%3.10%3.39%2.57%3.07%2.76%

Frequently Asked Questions


CQQQ and EFA have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CQQQ has higher volatility (10.63%) compared to EFA (5.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CQQQ dropped -73.99% vs EFA's -61.04%.

On 10-year performance, EFA leads with 9.84% vs 5.36% for CQQQ. On fees, EFA is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, EFA has been the lower-risk option at 5.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, EFA has performed better with a 9.84% return vs 5.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EFA is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for CQQQ.

EFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.09%, compared with 2.20% for CQQQ.

CQQQ is categorized as China Equities, while EFA is Foreign Large Cap Equities. CQQQ tracks FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index, while EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for CQQQ and 0.32% for EFA.

EFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.31 vs 0.71), 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 EFA

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