DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L
DRDR.L (iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DRDR.L is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, DRDR.L returned -0.91%/yr vs 19.03%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DRDR.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.
Performance
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
DRDR.L is traded in GBp, while CNDX.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CNDX.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DRDR.L achieves a 1.01% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.90% return.
DRDR.L
- 1D
- 3.48%
- 1M
- 6.16%
- YTD
- 1.01%
- 6M
- -0.48%
- 1Y
- 21.74%
- 3Y*
- 3.43%
- 5Y*
- -0.91%
- 10Y*
- —
CNDX.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 10.21%
- YTD
- 20.90%
- 6M
- 19.02%
- 1Y
- 42.53%
- 3Y*
- 25.03%
- 5Y*
- 19.03%
- 10Y*
- 22.61%
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DRDR.L iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 1.01% | 10.25% | 2.62% | -2.51% | -14.93% | -5.21% | 48.69% | 8.88% | 2.12% | 23.69% |
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 20.14% | 11.22% | 28.66% | 48.50% | -25.54% | 29.17% | 43.97% | 32.82% | 4.84% | 20.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between DRDR.L and CNDX.L is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2016 | 0.63 |
Over the past year, the correlation between DRDR.L and CNDX.L has dropped to 0.33 - well below their long-term average of 0.63, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
DRDR.L
CNDX.L
Healthcare
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Healthcare
DRDR.L
CNDX.L
Technology
DRDR.L
CNDX.L
Industrials
DRDR.L
CNDX.L
Basic Materials
DRDR.L
CNDX.L
Financial Services
DRDR.L
CNDX.L
Consumer Defensive
DRDR.L
CNDX.L
Communication Services
DRDR.L
-
CNDX.L
Consumer Cyclical
DRDR.L
-
CNDX.L
Energy
DRDR.L
-
CNDX.L
Real Estate
DRDR.L
-
CNDX.L
Utilities
DRDR.L
-
CNDX.L
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
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank
DRDR.L
CNDX.L
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (DRDR.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.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.
| DRDR.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.47 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.73 | 3.77 | -2.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.35 | 10.74 | -6.38 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| DRDR.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.39 | 2.66 | -1.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.05 | 0.94 | -1.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.12 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | 1.17 | -0.83 |
Drawdowns
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DRDR.L drawdown since its inception was -38.49%, which is greater than CNDX.L's maximum drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DRDR.L and CNDX.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DRDR.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.49% | -27.74% | -10.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.51% | -11.11% | -1.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.38% | -24.37% | +1.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.81% | -27.74% | -8.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -27.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.88% | 0.00% | -16.88% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.17% | -4.72% | -10.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.98% | 3.93% | +1.05% |
Volatility
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (DRDR.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) have volatilities of 4.79% and 4.87%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DRDR.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.79% | 4.87% | -0.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.52% | 11.61% | -0.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.56% | 15.74% | -0.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.52% | 20.08% | -2.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.58% | 20.20% | -1.62% |
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
DRDR.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.
Dividends
DRDR.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither DRDR.L nor CNDX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.02% | 0.05% | 0.06% | 0.03% | 0.04% | 0.07% | 0.06% | 0.30% | 0.16% | 0.16% |
DRDR.L iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 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
DRDR.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNDX.L is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNDX.L is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for DRDR.L.
DRDR.L is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. DRDR.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for DRDR.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.
Find the right allocation for DRDR.L and CNDX.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