CQQQ vs. FHKAX
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX).
CQQQ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the AlphaShares China Technology Index. It was launched on Dec 8, 2009. FHKAX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on May 9, 2008.
Performance
CQQQ vs. FHKAX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
CQQQ vs. FHKAX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | -11.50% | 34.96% | 9.84% | -16.71% | -30.09% | -24.54% | 57.33% | 33.57% | -34.77% | 74.31% |
FHKAX Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A | 5.42% | 42.19% | 22.84% | -0.60% | -24.09% | -13.95% | 47.37% | 34.71% | -17.67% | 51.46% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CQQQ achieves a -11.50% return, which is significantly lower than FHKAX's 5.42% return. Over the past 10 years, CQQQ has underperformed FHKAX with an annualized return of 3.76%, while FHKAX has yielded a comparatively higher 11.83% annualized return.
CQQQ
- 1D
- 2.91%
- 1M
- -11.62%
- YTD
- -11.50%
- 6M
- -20.29%
- 1Y
- 6.15%
- 3Y*
- 0.59%
- 5Y*
- -10.73%
- 10Y*
- 3.76%
FHKAX
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- -9.06%
- YTD
- 5.42%
- 6M
- 6.13%
- 1Y
- 43.43%
- 3Y*
- 19.54%
- 5Y*
- 2.51%
- 10Y*
- 11.83%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CQQQ vs. FHKAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
CQQQ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than FHKAX's 1.21% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
CQQQ vs. FHKAX — Risk / Return Rank
CQQQ
FHKAX
CQQQ vs. FHKAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX). 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.
| CQQQ | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.19 | 1.85 | -1.66 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.51 | 2.39 | -1.89 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.34 | -0.28 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.23 | 2.48 | -2.25 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.63 | 9.62 | -8.98 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CQQQ | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.19 | 1.85 | -1.66 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.29 | 0.11 | -0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.11 | 0.54 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.16 | 0.31 | -0.15 |
Correlation
The correlation between CQQQ and FHKAX is 0.80, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
CQQQ vs. FHKAX - Dividend Comparison
CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, more than FHKAX's 1.51% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.45% | 2.17% | 0.28% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.41% | 1.69% | 1.77% |
FHKAX Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A | 1.51% | 1.59% | 1.22% | 1.58% | 0.59% | 10.80% | 4.71% | 0.38% | 0.39% | 0.21% | 0.99% | 15.33% |
Drawdowns
CQQQ vs. FHKAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CQQQ drawdown since its inception was -73.99%, which is greater than FHKAX's maximum drawdown of -58.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CQQQ and FHKAX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| CQQQ | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -73.99% | -58.62% | -15.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.41% | -15.97% | -8.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -67.04% | -54.04% | -13.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -73.99% | -58.62% | -15.37% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -56.10% | -10.83% | -45.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.04% | -19.15% | -8.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.99% | 4.12% | +4.87% |
Volatility
CQQQ vs. FHKAX - Volatility Comparison
Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a higher volatility of 10.60% compared to Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX) at 9.26%. This indicates that CQQQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FHKAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| CQQQ | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.60% | 9.26% | +1.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.75% | 16.44% | +4.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.95% | 23.16% | +8.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.72% | 23.95% | +13.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 33.06% | 22.09% | +10.97% |