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

Performance

CQQQ vs. KSTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR). 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 KSTR's 32.94% return.


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%

KSTR

1D
1.39%
1M
7.01%
YTD
32.94%
6M
38.23%
1Y
83.76%
3Y*
16.36%
5Y*
-0.21%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CQQQ vs. KSTR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CQQQ
Invesco China Technology ETF
2.46%34.96%9.84%-16.71%-30.09%-34.59%
KSTR
KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF
32.94%42.82%6.12%-17.93%-38.51%-1.70%

Correlation

The correlation between CQQQ and KSTR is 0.79, 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

0.79

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

0.77

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

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2021

0.68

The correlation between CQQQ and KSTR shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (5 years) to 0.79 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CQQQ vs. KSTR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CQQQ
KSTR

Technology

58.2%
78.5%

Communication Services

21.9%

-

Consumer Cyclical

13.8%
1.4%

Industrials

1.3%
6.5%

Financial Services

0.1%

-

Basic Materials

0.1%
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

0.9%

Healthcare

-

4.1%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

CQQQ
58.2%
KSTR
78.5%

Communication Services

CQQQ
21.9%
KSTR

-

Consumer Cyclical

CQQQ
13.8%
KSTR
1.4%

Industrials

CQQQ
1.3%
KSTR
6.5%

Financial Services

CQQQ
0.1%
KSTR

-

Basic Materials

CQQQ
0.1%
KSTR
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

CQQQ

-

KSTR

-

Energy

CQQQ

-

KSTR
0.9%

Healthcare

CQQQ

-

KSTR
4.1%

Real Estate

CQQQ

-

KSTR

-

Utilities

CQQQ

-

KSTR

-

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. KSTR — 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

KSTR
KSTR Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
KSTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KSTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
KSTR Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
KSTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
KSTR Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
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. KSTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR). 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.


CQQQKSTRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.40

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.35

4.76

-3.41

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.16

12.06

-8.90

CQQQ vs. KSTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CQQQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.11, which is lower than the KSTR Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CQQQ and KSTR, 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


CQQQKSTRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.11

2.37

-1.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.20

-0.01

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.19

-0.00

+0.19

Drawdowns

CQQQ vs. KSTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CQQQ drawdown since its inception was -73.99%, which is greater than KSTR's maximum drawdown of -66.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CQQQ and KSTR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CQQQKSTRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-73.99%

-66.46%

-7.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.41%

-17.70%

-6.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-35.93%

-41.55%

+5.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-66.96%

-66.46%

-0.50%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-49.18%

-10.98%

-38.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.29%

-38.77%

+10.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.39%

6.97%

+3.42%

Volatility

CQQQ vs. KSTR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) is 11.60%, while KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR) has a volatility of 15.14%. This indicates that CQQQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KSTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CQQQKSTRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.60%

15.14%

-3.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.88%

26.21%

-4.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.78%

35.48%

-5.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

38.02%

38.31%

-0.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.30%

37.68%

-4.38%

CQQQ vs. KSTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CQQQ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KSTR's 0.89% expense ratio.


Dividends

CQQQ vs. KSTR - Dividend Comparison

CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, while KSTR has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
KSTR
KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CQQQ and KSTR have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KSTR has higher volatility (15.14%) compared to CQQQ (11.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CQQQ dropped -73.99% vs KSTR's -66.46%.

On 5-year performance, KSTR leads with -0.21% vs -7.50% for CQQQ. On fees, CQQQ is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, CQQQ has been the lower-risk option at 11.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, KSTR has performed better with a -0.21% return vs -7.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CQQQ is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for KSTR.

CQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.11%, compared with 0.00% for KSTR.

CQQQ tracks AlphaShares China Technology Index, while KSTR tracks SSE Science and Technology Innovation Board 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for CQQQ and 0.89% for KSTR.

KSTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 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 KSTR

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