PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GSPX.L (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF) and CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - GSPX.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while CNX1.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GSPX.L returned 12.56%/yr vs 18.83%/yr for CNX1.L. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GSPX.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for CNX1.L.

Performance

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (GSPX.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

GSPX.L is traded in GBP, while CNX1.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CNX1.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSPX.L achieves a 10.04% return, which is significantly lower than CNX1.L's 19.85% return.

GSPX.L

1D
-0.03%
1M
4.53%
YTD
10.04%
6M
10.80%
1Y
27.24%
3Y*
21.42%
5Y*
12.56%
10Y*
—

CNX1.L

1D
-0.63%
1M
9.63%
YTD
19.85%
6M
18.42%
1Y
41.69%
3Y*
24.68%
5Y*
18.83%
10Y*
22.43%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
GSPX.L
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF		10.04%17.15%24.63%24.88%-20.60%28.94%15.10%27.75%-8.17%
CNX1.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		19.85%11.57%28.51%47.71%-25.53%29.50%43.24%33.63%-7.19%

Correlation

The correlation between GSPX.L and CNX1.L is 0.78, 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

0.78

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

0.79

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

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 4, 2018

0.78

The correlation between GSPX.L and CNX1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
GSPX.L
CNX1.L

Technology

38.6%
57.3%

Financial Services

11.3%
0.2%

Communication Services

10.6%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
11.6%

Healthcare

8.2%
3.8%

Industrials

7.6%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.6%
6.9%

Energy

3.3%
0.5%

Utilities

2.6%
1.3%

Basic Materials

1.7%
1.1%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.1%

Technology

GSPX.L
38.6%
CNX1.L
57.3%

Financial Services

GSPX.L
11.3%
CNX1.L
0.2%

Communication Services

GSPX.L
10.6%
CNX1.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

GSPX.L
9.6%
CNX1.L
11.6%

Healthcare

GSPX.L
8.2%
CNX1.L
3.8%

Industrials

GSPX.L
7.6%
CNX1.L
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

GSPX.L
4.6%
CNX1.L
6.9%

Energy

GSPX.L
3.3%
CNX1.L
0.5%

Utilities

GSPX.L
2.6%
CNX1.L
1.3%

Basic Materials

GSPX.L
1.7%
CNX1.L
1.1%

Real Estate

GSPX.L
1.7%
CNX1.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.

iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

Often compared with GSPX.L:
GSPX.L vs. CSPX.LGSPX.L vs. VUSA.LGSPX.L vs. SPYGSPX.L vs. PPFB.DEGSPX.L vs. VUAG.LGSPX.L vs. P500.DEGSPX.L vs. VOO
Often compared with CNX1.L:
CNX1.L vs. CNDX.LCNX1.L vs. EQQQ.LCNX1.L vs. IITU.LCNX1.L vs. EQGB.LCNX1.L vs. QQQCNX1.L vs. XNAQ.LCNX1.L vs. SXRV.DE

Return for Risk

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
GSPX.L
GSPX.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
GSPX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSPX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSPX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
GSPX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSPX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
CNX1.L
CNX1.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (GSPX.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.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.

GSPX.LCNX1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.34
2.82

-0.48

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.39
3.72

-0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.50

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.22

3.76

-0.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.09

11.10

+2.99

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSPX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSPX.L and CNX1.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

GSPX.LCNX1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.34

2.82

-0.48

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.78

0.98

-0.20

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

1.16

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.78

1.14

-0.37

Drawdowns

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSPX.L drawdown since its inception was -34.88%, which is greater than CNX1.L's maximum drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSPX.L and CNX1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

GSPX.LCNX1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.88%

-27.56%

-7.32%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.43%

-11.03%

+2.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.91%

-24.56%

+5.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.77%

-27.56%

+1.79%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-27.56%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.52%

-0.63%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.61%

-4.57%

-1.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.93%

3.75%

-1.82%

Volatility

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (GSPX.L) is 3.17%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) has a volatility of 4.13%. This indicates that GSPX.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNX1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

GSPX.LCNX1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.17%

4.13%

-0.96%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.48%

10.38%

-1.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.57%

14.70%

-3.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.05%

19.16%

-3.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.63%

19.44%

-1.81%

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSPX.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than CNX1.L's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

GSPX.L vs. CNX1.L - Dividend Comparison

GSPX.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, while CNX1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
CNX1.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
GSPX.L
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF		0.80%0.89%0.99%1.15%1.40%0.96%1.31%1.50%0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

GSPX.L and CNX1.L have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, GSPX.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

GSPX.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for CNX1.L.

GSPX.L is categorized as S&P 500, while CNX1.L is Nasdaq-100. GSPX.L tracks S&P 500 Index, while CNX1.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for GSPX.L and 0.36% for CNX1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GSPX.L and CNX1.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