CQQQ vs. KWEB
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB).
CQQQ and KWEB are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. 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. KWEB is a passively managed fund by CICC that tracks the performance of the CSI Overseas China Internet. It was launched on Jul 31, 2013. Both CQQQ and KWEB are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CQQQ or KWEB.
Key characteristics
| CQQQ | KWEB | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 16.69% | 12.93% |
| 1Y Return | 12.00% | 11.68% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -16.68% | -13.81% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | -2.75% | -6.30% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 1.62% | -0.86% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.38 | 0.36 |
| Sortino Ratio | 0.86 | 0.83 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.10 | 1.10 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.20 | 0.19 |
| Martin Ratio | 1.07 | 1.13 |
| Ulcer Index | 13.68% | 12.45% |
| Daily Std Dev | 38.53% | 38.69% |
| Max Drawdown | -73.99% | -80.92% |
| Current Drawdown | -60.96% | -67.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between CQQQ and KWEB is 0.90, 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.
Performance
CQQQ vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CQQQ achieves a 16.69% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's 12.93% return. Over the past 10 years, CQQQ has outperformed KWEB with an annualized return of 1.62%, while KWEB has yielded a comparatively lower -0.86% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
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. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison
CQQQ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.76% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CQQQ vs. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). 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.
Dividends
CQQQ vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison
CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.47%, less than KWEB's 1.51% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 0.47% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.42% | 1.69% | 1.77% | 1.00% | 0.79% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | 1.51% | 1.71% | 0.00% | 7.07% | 0.29% | 0.08% | 3.40% | 0.58% | 1.19% | 0.46% | 0.89% | 0.31% |
Drawdowns
CQQQ vs. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CQQQ drawdown since its inception was -73.99%, smaller than the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CQQQ and KWEB. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CQQQ vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison
Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) have volatilities of 13.68% and 13.03%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.