ECNS vs. CQQQ
ECNS (iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both China Equities funds - ECNS tracks the MSCI China Small Cap Index while CQQQ tracks the FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ECNS returned 0.73%/yr vs 5.21%/yr for CQQQ. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ECNS charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.
Performance
ECNS vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ECNS achieves a -13.41% return, which is significantly lower than CQQQ's 2.31% return. Over the past 10 years, ECNS has underperformed CQQQ with an annualized return of 0.73%, while CQQQ has yielded a comparatively higher 5.21% annualized return.
ECNS
- 1D
- -2.61%
- 1M
- -7.53%
- 6M
- -18.85%
- YTD
- -13.41%
- 1Y
- -8.94%
- 3Y*
- 3.56%
- 5Y*
- -8.73%
- 10Y*
- 0.73%
CQQQ
- 1D
- -4.39%
- 1M
- 3.70%
- 6M
- -9.66%
- YTD
- 2.31%
- 1Y
- 23.64%
- 3Y*
- 9.49%
- 5Y*
- -6.97%
- 10Y*
- 5.21%
ECNS vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | -13.41% | 36.49% | 5.64% | -23.05% | -24.58% | 2.11% | 25.42% | 7.84% | -18.27% | 27.55% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.31% | 34.96% | 9.84% | -16.71% | -30.09% | -24.54% | 57.33% | 33.57% | -34.77% | 74.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between ECNS and CQQQ is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2010 | 0.74 |
The correlation between ECNS and CQQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.80 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ECNS vs. CQQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ECNS
CQQQ
Industrials
Healthcare
-
Technology
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
ECNS
CQQQ
Healthcare
ECNS
CQQQ
-
Technology
ECNS
CQQQ
Basic Materials
ECNS
CQQQ
Real Estate
ECNS
CQQQ
-
Consumer Cyclical
ECNS
CQQQ
Communication Services
ECNS
CQQQ
Financial Services
ECNS
CQQQ
Consumer Defensive
ECNS
CQQQ
-
Energy
ECNS
CQQQ
-
Utilities
ECNS
CQQQ
-
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
ECNS vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
ECNS
CQQQ
ECNS vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). 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.
| ECNS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.68 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.15 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.35 | 0.97 | -1.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.77 | 2.19 | -2.96 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ECNS vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ECNS drawdown since its inception was -63.43%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECNS and CQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ECNS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.43% | -73.99% | +10.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.73% | -24.41% | -1.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.72% | -35.93% | +4.21% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -58.38% | -64.45% | +6.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -63.43% | -73.99% | +10.56% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -44.26% | -49.25% | +4.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.46% | -28.41% | -1.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.64% | 10.81% | +0.83% |
Volatility
ECNS vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) is 6.17%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 12.05%. This indicates that ECNS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ECNS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.17% | 12.05% | -5.88% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.93% | 24.64% | -10.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.99% | 31.89% | -10.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.47% | 38.30% | -8.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.80% | 33.48% | -7.68% |
ECNS vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ECNS has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
ECNS vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
ECNS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.79%, more than CQQQ's 2.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.12% | 2.17% | 0.28% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.41% | 1.69% | 1.77% |
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | 6.79% | 6.20% | 5.98% | 4.89% | 3.54% | 4.87% | 3.59% | 3.23% | 6.16% | 3.18% | 4.29% | 3.58% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ECNS and CQQQ have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CQQQ has higher volatility (12.05%) compared to ECNS (6.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECNS dropped -63.43% vs CQQQ's -73.99%.
On 10-year performance, CQQQ leads with 5.21% vs 0.73% for ECNS. On fees, ECNS is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ECNS has been the lower-risk option at 6.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CQQQ has performed better with a 5.21% return vs 0.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ECNS is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for CQQQ.
ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.79%, compared with 2.12% for CQQQ.
ECNS tracks MSCI China Small Cap Index, while CQQQ tracks FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for ECNS and 0.70% for CQQQ.
CQQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.75 vs -0.43), 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.
Find the right allocation for ECNS and CQQQ
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