GXC vs. CQQQ
GXC (SPDR S&P China ETF) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both China Equities funds - GXC tracks the S&P China BMI Index while CQQQ tracks the FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GXC returned 4.47%/yr vs 4.11%/yr for CQQQ. Their correlation of 0.88 means they have usually moved in the same direction. GXC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.
Performance
GXC vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GXC achieves a -4.74% return, which is significantly lower than CQQQ's -3.48% return. Over the past 10 years, GXC has outperformed CQQQ with an annualized return of 4.47%, while CQQQ has yielded a comparatively lower 4.11% annualized return.
GXC
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 6.22%
- 6M
- -8.33%
- YTD
- -4.74%
- 1Y
- 3.61%
- 3Y*
- 8.28%
- 5Y*
- -2.36%
- 10Y*
- 4.47%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.94%
CQQQ
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- -7.04%
- 6M
- -8.51%
- YTD
- -3.48%
- 1Y
- 11.40%
- 3Y*
- 6.47%
- 5Y*
- -6.42%
- 10Y*
- 4.11%
- ALL TIME*
- 5.32%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $59.60M | $63.86M | $78.89M | |
| $4.12M | $2.73M | $2.50M |
GXC vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | -4.74% | 30.84% | 14.60% | -9.93% | -22.12% | -19.70% | 28.31% | 23.07% | -19.39% | 51.66% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | -3.48% | 34.96% | 9.84% | -16.71% | -30.09% | -24.54% | 57.33% | 33.57% | -34.77% | 74.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between GXC and CQQQ is 0.81, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.91 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 8, 2009 | 0.88 |
The correlation between GXC and CQQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (1 year) to 0.91 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GXC vs. CQQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GXC
CQQQ
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
-
Basic Materials
Energy
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
GXC
CQQQ
Financial Services
GXC
CQQQ
Communication Services
GXC
CQQQ
Technology
GXC
CQQQ
Industrials
GXC
CQQQ
Healthcare
GXC
CQQQ
-
Basic Materials
GXC
CQQQ
Energy
GXC
CQQQ
-
Consumer Defensive
GXC
CQQQ
-
Real Estate
GXC
CQQQ
-
Utilities
GXC
CQQQ
-
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. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
GXC
CQQQ
GXC vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) 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.
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 | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.09 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.20 | 0.47 | -0.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.42 | 1.01 | -0.59 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GXC vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GXC drawdown since its inception was -71.96%, roughly equal to the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GXC and CQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GXC | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -71.96% | -73.99% | +2.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.77% | -24.41% | +6.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.54% | -34.42% | +8.88% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -48.78% | -62.09% | +13.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -60.23% | -73.99% | +13.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -32.68% | -52.13% | +19.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.86% | -28.49% | -0.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.54% | 11.32% | -2.78% |
Volatility
GXC vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) is 5.06%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 10.99%. This indicates that GXC 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
| GXC | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.06% | 10.99% | -5.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.75% | 24.73% | -10.98% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.40% | 32.53% | -13.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.70% | 38.18% | -9.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.06% | 33.57% | -7.51% |
GXC vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
GXC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
GXC vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
GXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.17%, less than CQQQ's 2.24% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.24% | 2.17% | 0.28% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.41% | 1.69% | 1.77% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | 2.17% | 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 CQQQ have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CQQQ has higher volatility (10.99%) compared to GXC (5.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GXC dropped -71.96% vs CQQQ's -73.99%.
On 10-year performance, GXC leads with 4.47% vs 4.11% for CQQQ. On fees, GXC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, GXC has been the lower-risk option at 5.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GXC has performed better with a 4.47% return vs 4.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GXC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for CQQQ.
CQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 2.17% for GXC.
GXC tracks S&P China BMI Index, while CQQQ tracks FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for GXC and 0.70% for CQQQ.
CQQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.35 vs 0.19), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for GXC 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