CQQQ vs. EFA
CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) and EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CQQQ is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index, while EFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CQQQ returned 5.36%/yr vs 9.84%/yr for EFA. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CQQQ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for EFA.
Performance
CQQQ vs. EFA - Performance Comparison
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%
CQQQ vs. EFA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
CQQQ
EFA
Communication Services
CQQQ
EFA
Consumer Cyclical
CQQQ
EFA
Industrials
CQQQ
EFA
Financial Services
CQQQ
EFA
Basic Materials
CQQQ
EFA
Consumer Defensive
CQQQ
-
EFA
Energy
CQQQ
-
EFA
Healthcare
CQQQ
-
EFA
Real Estate
CQQQ
-
EFA
Utilities
CQQQ
-
EFA
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
CQQQ
EFA
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.
| CQQQ | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| CQQQ | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -51.07% | -0.61% | -50.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.32% | -11.92% | -16.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| CQQQ | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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