PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX

Last updated Jul 16, 2026
Documentation

CURE.AX (Global X S&P Biotech ETF) and ACDC.AX (Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CURE.AX is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index, while ACDC.AX is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CURE.AX returned 5.62%/yr vs 12.89%/yr for ACDC.AX. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CURE.AX charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for ACDC.AX.

Performance

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a A$10,000 investment in Global X S&P Biotech ETF (CURE.AX) and Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF (ACDC.AX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CURE.AX achieves a 22.66% return, which is significantly higher than ACDC.AX's 5.57% return.

CURE.AX

1D
0.58%
1M
17.05%
6M
20.39%
YTD
22.66%
1Y
65.69%
3Y*
21.60%
5Y*
5.62%
10Y*
—

ACDC.AX

1D
-0.70%
1M
-13.60%
6M
-5.45%
YTD
5.57%
1Y
56.36%
3Y*
15.49%
5Y*
12.89%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
CURE.AX
Global X S&P Biotech ETF		22.66%25.25%8.13%10.63%-22.98%-17.10%38.31%35.60%-13.56%
ACDC.AX
Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF		5.57%59.62%7.63%7.32%-8.33%20.60%63.17%18.91%-7.67%

Correlation

The correlation between CURE.AX and ACDC.AX is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.27

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

0.34

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

0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2018

0.36

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Global X S&P Biotech ETF

Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF

Return for Risk

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CURE.AX
CURE.AX Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
CURE.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CURE.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
CURE.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
CURE.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
CURE.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX
ACDC.AX Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
ACDC.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACDC.AX 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.

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P Biotech ETF (CURE.AX) and Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF (ACDC.AX). 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.

CURE.AXACDC.AXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.62
1.87

+0.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.46
2.47

+0.99

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.31

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.80

2.68

+3.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.61

8.82

+5.80

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CURE.AX Sharpe Ratio is 2.62, which is higher than the ACDC.AX Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CURE.AX and ACDC.AX, 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...

Drawdowns

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CURE.AX drawdown since its inception was -59.81%, which is greater than ACDC.AX's maximum drawdown of -27.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CURE.AX and ACDC.AX.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CURE.AXACDC.AXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.81%

-27.23%

-32.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.68%

-20.29%

+8.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.37%

-26.50%

-1.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-50.92%

-27.07%

-23.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.45%

-19.68%

+14.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-27.38%

-8.15%

-19.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.66%

6.25%

-1.59%

Volatility

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX - Volatility Comparison

Global X S&P Biotech ETF (CURE.AX) has a higher volatility of 9.67% compared to Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF (ACDC.AX) at 7.06%. This indicates that CURE.AX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACDC.AX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CURE.AXACDC.AXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.67%

7.06%

+2.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.01%

23.28%

-2.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.95%

29.13%

-3.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.91%

21.97%

+8.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.70%

21.12%

+10.58%

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CURE.AX has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than ACDC.AX's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

CURE.AX vs. ACDC.AX - Dividend Comparison

CURE.AX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ACDC.AX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.39%.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
ACDC.AX
Global X Battery Tech & Lithium ETF		12.39%0.91%6.82%3.96%0.89%6.76%0.95%2.39%
CURE.AX
Global X S&P Biotech ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.06%11.64%9.47%2.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

CURE.AX and ACDC.AX have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CURE.AX is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CURE.AX is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for ACDC.AX.

CURE.AX is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while ACDC.AX is Alternative Energy Equities. CURE.AX tracks S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index, while ACDC.AX tracks Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CURE.AX and 0.69% for ACDC.AX.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CURE.AX and ACDC.AX

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