GXC vs. CNQQ
GXC (SPDR S&P China ETF) and CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) are both China Equities funds - GXC tracks the S&P China BMI Index while CNQQ tracks the Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GXC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CNQQ.
Performance
GXC vs. CNQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GXC achieves a -8.73% return, which is significantly lower than CNQQ's 10.04% return.
GXC
- 1D
- -2.39%
- 1M
- -5.30%
- YTD
- -8.73%
- 6M
- -9.84%
- 1Y
- 4.52%
- 3Y*
- 9.44%
- 5Y*
- -5.29%
- 10Y*
- 5.03%
CNQQ
- 1D
- -3.47%
- 1M
- 1.11%
- YTD
- 10.04%
- 6M
- 9.35%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GXC vs. CNQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | -8.73% | -5.03% |
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 10.04% | -5.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between GXC and CNQQ is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2025 | 0.83 |
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
GXC vs. CNQQ — Risk / Return Rank
GXC
CNQQ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GXC vs. CNQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) and Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ). 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.
| GXC | CNQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.28 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.66 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GXC vs. CNQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GXC drawdown since its inception was -71.96%, which is greater than CNQQ's maximum drawdown of -17.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GXC and CNQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GXC | CNQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -71.96% | -17.82% | -54.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.05% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.54% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.99% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -60.23% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -35.50% | -3.47% | -32.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.83% | -8.81% | -20.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.84% | — | — |
Volatility
GXC vs. CNQQ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GXC | CNQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.01% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.12% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.12% | 25.33% | -6.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.02% | 25.33% | +3.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.06% | 25.33% | +0.73% |
GXC vs. CNQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
GXC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than CNQQ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
GXC vs. CNQQ - Dividend Comparison
GXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%, more than CNQQ's 0.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 0.23% | 0.09% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | 2.27% | 2.40% | 2.81% | 3.70% | 2.67% | 1.35% | 1.04% | 1.60% | 2.03% | 1.84% | 2.05% | 2.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GXC and CNQQ have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GXC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GXC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNQQ.
GXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 0.23% for CNQQ.
GXC tracks S&P China BMI Index, while CNQQ tracks Solactive ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Rayliant. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for GXC and 0.75% for CNQQ.
Find the right allocation for GXC and CNQQ
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