PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CSP1.L (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF) and CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - CSP1.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while CNX1.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CSP1.L returned 16.07%/yr vs 22.43%/yr for CNX1.L. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CSP1.L charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for CNX1.L.

Performance

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSP1.L achieves a 10.55% return, which is significantly lower than CNX1.L's 19.85% return. Over the past 10 years, CSP1.L has underperformed CNX1.L with an annualized return of 16.07%, while CNX1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 22.43% annualized return.

CSP1.L

1D
0.05%
1M
5.54%
YTD
10.55%
6M
10.48%
1Y
29.13%
3Y*
19.02%
5Y*
14.94%
10Y*
16.07%

CNX1.L

1D
-0.63%
1M
9.63%
YTD
19.85%
6M
18.42%
1Y
41.69%
3Y*
24.68%
5Y*
18.83%
10Y*
22.43%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CSP1.L
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF		10.55%9.37%27.35%19.79%-9.05%31.07%13.65%26.42%0.01%10.83%
CNX1.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		19.85%11.57%28.51%47.71%-25.53%29.50%43.24%33.63%4.62%20.13%

Correlation

The correlation between CSP1.L and CNX1.L is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.92

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

0.91

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

0.91

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

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2010

0.82

The correlation between CSP1.L and CNX1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CSP1.L
CNX1.L

Technology

38.0%
57.3%

Financial Services

11.3%
0.2%

Communication Services

10.7%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

9.9%
11.6%

Healthcare

8.4%
3.8%

Industrials

7.9%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%
6.9%

Energy

3.4%
0.5%

Utilities

2.2%
1.3%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.1%

Basic Materials

1.7%
1.1%

Technology

CSP1.L
38.0%
CNX1.L
57.3%

Financial Services

CSP1.L
11.3%
CNX1.L
0.2%

Communication Services

CSP1.L
10.7%
CNX1.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CSP1.L
9.9%
CNX1.L
11.6%

Healthcare

CSP1.L
8.4%
CNX1.L
3.8%

Industrials

CSP1.L
7.9%
CNX1.L
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

CSP1.L
4.7%
CNX1.L
6.9%

Energy

CSP1.L
3.4%
CNX1.L
0.5%

Utilities

CSP1.L
2.2%
CNX1.L
1.3%

Real Estate

CSP1.L
1.9%
CNX1.L
0.1%

Basic Materials

CSP1.L
1.7%
CNX1.L
1.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

Often compared with CSP1.L:
CSP1.L vs. CSPX.LCSP1.L vs. VUAG.LCSP1.L vs. SPYCSP1.L vs. IUSA.LCSP1.L vs. VUAA.LCSP1.L vs. SPY5.LCSP1.L vs. VOO
Often compared with CNX1.L:
CNX1.L vs. CNDX.LCNX1.L vs. EQQQ.LCNX1.L vs. IITU.LCNX1.L vs. EQGB.LCNX1.L vs. QQQCNX1.L vs. XNAQ.LCNX1.L vs. SXRV.DE

Return for Risk

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CSP1.L
CSP1.L Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
CSP1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSP1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSP1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
CSP1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSP1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank
CNX1.L
CNX1.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L). 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.

CSP1.LCNX1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.73
2.82

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.66
3.72

-0.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.51

1.50

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.07

3.76

+0.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.99

11.10

+3.89

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSP1.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.73, which is comparable to the CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSP1.L and CNX1.L, 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

CSP1.LCNX1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.73

2.82

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.04

0.98

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.03

1.16

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.09

1.14

-0.05

Drawdowns

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSP1.L drawdown since its inception was -25.48%, smaller than the maximum CNX1.L drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSP1.L and CNX1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CSP1.LCNX1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.48%

-27.56%

+2.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.12%

-11.03%

+3.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.77%

-24.56%

+3.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.77%

-27.56%

+6.79%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.48%

-27.56%

+2.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.24%

-0.63%

+0.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.32%

-4.57%

+1.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.94%

3.75%

-1.81%

Volatility

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) is 2.62%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) has a volatility of 4.13%. This indicates that CSP1.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNX1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CSP1.LCNX1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.62%

4.13%

-1.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.16%

10.38%

-3.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.62%

14.70%

-4.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.31%

19.16%

-4.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.57%

19.44%

-3.87%

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSP1.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than CNX1.L's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSP1.L vs. CNX1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CSP1.L nor CNX1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.92, CSP1.L and CNX1.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, CSP1.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CSP1.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for CNX1.L.

CSP1.L is categorized as S&P 500, while CNX1.L is Nasdaq-100. CSP1.L tracks S&P 500 Index, while CNX1.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for CSP1.L and 0.36% for CNX1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CSP1.L and CNX1.L

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