FXC.AS vs. CQQQ
FXC.AS (iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both China Equities funds - FXC.AS tracks the MSCI China NR USD while CQQQ tracks the AlphaShares China Technology Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FXC.AS returned 3.01%/yr vs 5.15%/yr for CQQQ. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FXC.AS charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.
Performance
FXC.AS vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FXC.AS is traded in EUR, while CQQQ is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CQQQ values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FXC.AS achieves a -6.20% return, which is significantly lower than CQQQ's 4.70% return. Over the past 10 years, FXC.AS has underperformed CQQQ with an annualized return of 3.01%, while CQQQ has yielded a comparatively higher 5.15% annualized return.
FXC.AS
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- -2.11%
- YTD
- -6.20%
- 6M
- -8.22%
- 1Y
- -1.13%
- 3Y*
- 9.37%
- 5Y*
- -2.02%
- 10Y*
- 3.01%
CQQQ
- 1D
- 0.89%
- 1M
- 6.21%
- YTD
- 4.70%
- 6M
- 5.72%
- 1Y
- 29.29%
- 3Y*
- 8.31%
- 5Y*
- -6.44%
- 10Y*
- 5.15%
FXC.AS vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXC.AS iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF | -6.20% | 14.11% | 38.75% | -15.70% | -16.24% | -13.34% | 1.28% | 15.82% | -7.05% | 19.38% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 4.70% | 18.95% | 17.09% | -19.21% | -25.76% | -18.89% | 44.37% | 36.58% | -31.71% | 52.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between FXC.AS 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 | 0.71 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2009 | 0.68 |
The correlation between FXC.AS and CQQQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
FXC.AS vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
FXC.AS
CQQQ
FXC.AS vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (FXC.AS) 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.
| FXC.AS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.19 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.07 | 1.28 | -1.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.16 | 2.89 | -3.05 |
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
| FXC.AS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.06 | 1.02 | -1.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.07 | -0.18 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.12 | 0.16 | -0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.22 | 0.24 | -0.02 |
Drawdowns
FXC.AS vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FXC.AS drawdown since its inception was -66.56%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -70.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXC.AS and CQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FXC.AS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -66.56% | -70.82% | +4.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.19% | -22.97% | +7.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.68% | -34.70% | +7.02% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.26% | -63.57% | +16.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -53.70% | -70.82% | +17.12% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.10% | -46.48% | +23.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.51% | -25.51% | 0.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.09% | 10.15% | -3.06% |
Volatility
FXC.AS vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (FXC.AS) is 6.92%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 11.01%. This indicates that FXC.AS 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
| FXC.AS | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.92% | 11.01% | -4.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.77% | 20.99% | -8.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.95% | 28.91% | -10.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.17% | 36.55% | -8.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.05% | 32.55% | -7.50% |
FXC.AS vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
FXC.AS has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
FXC.AS vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
FXC.AS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, more than CQQQ's 2.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.09% | 2.17% | 0.28% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.41% | 1.69% | 1.77% |
FXC.AS iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF | 2.24% | 2.07% | 2.48% | 2.68% | 2.53% | 2.10% | 2.93% | 2.74% | 3.48% | 2.83% | 2.62% | 2.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FXC.AS 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.
On fees, CQQQ is cheaper at 0.70% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CQQQ is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FXC.AS.
FXC.AS tracks MSCI China NR USD, while CQQQ tracks AlphaShares China Technology Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FXC.AS and 0.70% for CQQQ.
Find the right allocation for FXC.AS 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