PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

EQQQ.L (Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, from Invesco and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EQQQ.L returned 22.24%/yr vs 22.23%/yr for CNDX.L. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EQQQ.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQQ.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EQQQ.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

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with EQQQ.L having a 17.18% return and CNDX.L slightly higher at 17.45%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with EQQQ.L having a 22.24% annualized return and CNDX.L not far behind at 22.23%.

EQQQ.L

1D
2.53%
1M
0.63%
YTD
17.18%
6M
17.41%
1Y
38.39%
3Y*
23.63%
5Y*
17.89%
10Y*
22.24%

CNDX.L

1D
3.10%
1M
0.13%
YTD
17.45%
6M
17.83%
1Y
38.28%
3Y*
23.70%
5Y*
17.88%
10Y*
22.23%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EQQQ.L
Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF		17.18%11.54%28.55%47.79%-25.54%29.59%43.32%33.69%4.64%20.12%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		17.45%11.22%28.63%48.41%-25.58%29.13%43.89%32.71%4.78%20.50%

Correlation

The correlation between EQQQ.L and CNDX.L is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.95

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

0.96

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

0.96

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

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2010

0.94

The correlation between EQQQ.L and CNDX.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EQQQ.L
CNDX.L

Technology

59.0%
60.0%

Communication Services

13.7%
13.5%

Consumer Cyclical

10.9%
10.8%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
6.4%

Healthcare

3.8%
3.6%

Industrials

2.9%
2.8%

Utilities

1.2%
1.1%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.0%

Energy

0.5%
0.5%

Financial Services

0.2%
0.2%

Real Estate

0.0%
0.1%

Technology

EQQQ.L
59.0%
CNDX.L
60.0%

Communication Services

EQQQ.L
13.7%
CNDX.L
13.5%

Consumer Cyclical

EQQQ.L
10.9%
CNDX.L
10.8%

Consumer Defensive

EQQQ.L
6.8%
CNDX.L
6.4%

Healthcare

EQQQ.L
3.8%
CNDX.L
3.6%

Industrials

EQQQ.L
2.9%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Utilities

EQQQ.L
1.2%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Basic Materials

EQQQ.L
1.1%
CNDX.L
1.0%

Energy

EQQQ.L
0.5%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Financial Services

EQQQ.L
0.2%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Real Estate

EQQQ.L
0.0%
CNDX.L
0.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with EQQQ.L:
EQQQ.L vs. QQQEQQQ.L vs. QQQMEQQQ.L vs. EQGB.LEQQQ.L vs. CNX1.LEQQQ.L vs. EQQU.LEQQQ.L vs. CSPX.LEQQQ.L vs. XNAQ.L
Often compared with CNDX.L:
CNDX.L vs. QQQCNDX.L vs. EQQQ.DECNDX.L vs. SXRV.DECNDX.L vs. CNX1.LCNDX.L vs. CSPX.LCNDX.L vs. EQQU.LCNDX.L vs. VWRA.L

Return for Risk

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EQQQ.L
EQQQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
EQQQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
CNDX.L
CNDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
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.

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQQ.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.

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.

EQQQ.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.45
2.31

+0.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.23
3.12

+0.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.41

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.41

3.40

+0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.90

9.51

+0.39

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQQQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is comparable to the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQQQ.L and CNDX.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...

Drawdowns

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQQQ.L drawdown since its inception was -65.36%, which is greater than CNDX.L's maximum drawdown of -27.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQQQ.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EQQQ.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-65.36%

-27.78%

-37.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.97%

-11.11%

+0.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.09%

-24.37%

+0.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.76%

-27.78%

+0.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.76%

-27.78%

+0.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.85%

-2.88%

+0.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.50%

-4.55%

-7.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.79%

3.99%

-0.20%

Volatility

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQQ.L) is 5.78%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 6.34%. This indicates that EQQQ.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EQQQ.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.78%

6.34%

-0.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.18%

12.45%

-1.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.31%

16.41%

-1.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.23%

20.20%

-0.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.39%

20.25%

-0.86%

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQQQ.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

EQQQ.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

EQQQ.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, while CNDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
EQQQ.L
Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF		0.23%0.29%0.38%0.39%0.56%0.25%0.41%0.56%0.63%0.67%0.77%0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.95, EQQQ.L and CNDX.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, EQQQ.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EQQQ.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Both ETFs track NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for EQQQ.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EQQQ.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