PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESIE.L vs. CNDX.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ESIE.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.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

ESIE.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, ESIE.L achieves a 34.22% return, which is significantly higher than CNDX.L's 20.14% return.


ESIE.L

1D
-1.00%
1M
-2.31%
YTD
34.22%
6M
30.17%
1Y
59.36%
3Y*
17.82%
5Y*
19.85%
10Y*

CNDX.L

1D
-0.66%
1M
9.52%
YTD
20.14%
6M
18.27%
1Y
41.64%
3Y*
24.77%
5Y*
18.88%
10Y*
22.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
ESIE.L
iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
34.22%20.13%-9.70%6.04%44.68%26.96%1.47%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF
20.14%11.22%28.66%48.50%-25.54%29.17%6.00%

Correlation

The correlation between ESIE.L and CNDX.L is -0.20, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.20

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

0.03

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

0.08

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 24, 2020

0.08

The correlation between ESIE.L and CNDX.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to 0.08 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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


Sectors
ESIE.L
CNDX.L

Energy

99.1%
0.5%

Communication Services

0.9%
14.5%

Basic Materials

-

1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

11.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.9%

Financial Services

-

0.2%

Healthcare

-

3.8%

Industrials

-

2.8%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Technology

-

57.3%

Utilities

-

1.3%

Energy

ESIE.L
99.1%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Communication Services

ESIE.L
0.9%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Basic Materials

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
11.6%

Consumer Defensive

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
6.9%

Financial Services

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
0.2%

Healthcare

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
3.8%

Industrials

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
2.8%

Real Estate

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
0.1%

Technology

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
57.3%

Utilities

ESIE.L

-

CNDX.L
1.3%

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

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ESIE.L
ESIE.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
ESIE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESIE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESIE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
ESIE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESIE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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: 7171
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.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.


ESIE.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.46

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.87

3.70

+1.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.82

10.51

+4.30

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

The current ESIE.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.58, which is comparable to the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESIE.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ESIE.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.58

2.61

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.82

0.94

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

1.17

-0.31

Drawdowns

ESIE.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESIE.L drawdown since its inception was -27.35%, roughly equal to the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESIE.L and CNDX.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ESIE.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.35%

-27.74%

+0.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.13%

-11.11%

-1.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.35%

-24.37%

-2.98%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.35%

-27.74%

+0.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.99%

-0.66%

-6.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.23%

-4.72%

-3.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.99%

3.93%

+0.06%

Volatility

ESIE.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.L) has a higher volatility of 8.04% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) at 4.89%. This indicates that ESIE.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ESIE.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.04%

4.89%

+3.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.18%

11.60%

+7.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.92%

15.74%

+7.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.32%

20.08%

+4.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.58%

20.20%

+4.38%

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

ESIE.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.


Dividends

ESIE.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESIE.L nor CNDX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
ESIE.L
iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (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


ESIE.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ESIE.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ESIE.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

ESIE.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. ESIE.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ESIE.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ESIE.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