FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L
FLOS.L (iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLOS.L is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist), while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLOS.L returned 4.01%/yr vs 15.67%/yr for CNDX.L. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLOS.L charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.
Performance
FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FLOS.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, FLOS.L achieves a 2.36% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 15.44% return.
FLOS.L
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- 6M
- 2.21%
- YTD
- 2.36%
- 1Y
- 4.64%
- 3Y*
- 5.41%
- 5Y*
- 4.01%
- 10Y*
- —
CNDX.L
- 1D
- -1.70%
- 1M
- -4.33%
- 6M
- 15.30%
- YTD
- 15.44%
- 1Y
- 27.03%
- 3Y*
- 22.42%
- 5Y*
- 15.67%
- 10Y*
- 20.65%
FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLOS.L iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 2.36% | 4.78% | 6.24% | 6.00% | 0.83% | 0.10% | 0.18% | 2.42% | -0.45% | 0.28% |
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 15.44% | 11.22% | 28.63% | 48.41% | -25.58% | 29.13% | 43.89% | 32.71% | 4.78% | 4.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLOS.L and CNDX.L is 0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 31, 2017 | 0.09 |
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
FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank
FLOS.L
CNDX.L
FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (FLOS.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.
| FLOS.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +5.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.00 | 1.28 | +0.72 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 15.76 | 2.42 | +13.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 79.94 | 6.60 | +73.34 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLOS.L drawdown since its inception was -14.78%, smaller than the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -27.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLOS.L and CNDX.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLOS.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.78% | -27.78% | +13.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.29% | -11.11% | +10.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.46% | -24.37% | +22.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -2.13% | -27.78% | +25.65% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -27.78% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.09% | -5.16% | +5.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.25% | -4.54% | +4.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.06% | 4.09% | -4.03% |
Volatility
FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (FLOS.L) is 0.22%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 6.03%. This indicates that FLOS.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
| FLOS.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.22% | 6.03% | -5.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.80% | 13.55% | -12.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.07% | 17.31% | -16.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.68% | 20.37% | -18.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.36% | 20.19% | -16.83% |
FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLOS.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLOS.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison
FLOS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.68%, while CNDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
FLOS.L iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 4.68% | 5.02% | 5.93% | 5.46% | 1.50% | 0.57% | 1.62% | 2.95% | 2.27% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLOS.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FLOS.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FLOS.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.
FLOS.L is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. FLOS.L tracks iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist), while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for FLOS.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.
Find the right allocation for FLOS.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