HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L
HEAL.L (iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HEAL.L is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HEAL.L returned -1.96%/yr vs 17.61%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HEAL.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.
Performance
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HEAL.L achieves a 0.64% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 19.65% return.
HEAL.L
- 1D
- 3.48%
- 1M
- 4.82%
- YTD
- 0.64%
- 6M
- -0.41%
- 1Y
- 20.32%
- 3Y*
- 6.08%
- 5Y*
- -1.96%
- 10Y*
- —
CNDX.L
- 1D
- -0.66%
- 1M
- 8.52%
- YTD
- 19.65%
- 6M
- 19.10%
- 1Y
- 40.28%
- 3Y*
- 27.98%
- 5Y*
- 17.61%
- 10Y*
- 21.62%
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HEAL.L iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.64% | 18.42% | 0.96% | 3.11% | -24.00% | -6.52% | 54.05% | 12.43% | -3.45% | 35.92% |
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 19.65% | 19.75% | 26.45% | 56.31% | -33.45% | 27.96% | 48.33% | 38.07% | -1.03% | 32.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between HEAL.L and CNDX.L is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.63 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2016 | 0.67 |
Over the past year, the correlation between HEAL.L and CNDX.L has dropped to 0.43 - well below their long-term average of 0.67, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HEAL.L
CNDX.L
Healthcare
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Healthcare
HEAL.L
CNDX.L
Technology
HEAL.L
CNDX.L
Industrials
HEAL.L
CNDX.L
Basic Materials
HEAL.L
CNDX.L
Financial Services
HEAL.L
CNDX.L
Consumer Defensive
HEAL.L
CNDX.L
Communication Services
HEAL.L
-
CNDX.L
Consumer Cyclical
HEAL.L
-
CNDX.L
Energy
HEAL.L
-
CNDX.L
Real Estate
HEAL.L
-
CNDX.L
Utilities
HEAL.L
-
CNDX.L
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
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank
HEAL.L
CNDX.L
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (HEAL.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.
| HEAL.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.71 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.43 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.61 | 3.61 | -2.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.96 | 13.03 | -9.07 |
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
| HEAL.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.16 | 2.52 | -1.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.10 | 0.84 | -0.94 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.07 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 1.12 | -0.80 |
Drawdowns
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HEAL.L drawdown since its inception was -46.43%, which is greater than CNDX.L's maximum drawdown of -35.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HEAL.L and CNDX.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HEAL.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.43% | -35.17% | -11.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.59% | -11.00% | -1.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.46% | -22.44% | +0.98% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -43.70% | -35.17% | -8.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.17% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -20.00% | -0.76% | -19.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.60% | -5.30% | -13.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.12% | 3.07% | +2.05% |
Volatility
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (HEAL.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) have volatilities of 5.13% and 4.90%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HEAL.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.13% | 4.90% | +0.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.28% | 11.88% | +1.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.48% | 15.79% | +1.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.87% | 20.87% | -1.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.91% | 20.07% | -0.16% |
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
HEAL.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.
Dividends
HEAL.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither HEAL.L nor CNDX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.02% | 0.05% | 0.06% | 0.03% | 0.04% | 0.07% | 0.06% | 0.30% | 0.16% | 0.16% |
HEAL.L iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HEAL.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNDX.L is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNDX.L is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for HEAL.L.
HEAL.L is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. HEAL.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for HEAL.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.
Find the right allocation for HEAL.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