IBIT vs. CQQQ

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

IBIT (iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBIT is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant, while CQQQ is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBIT returned -39.67% vs 23.87% for CQQQ. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBIT charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.

Performance

IBIT vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBIT achieves a -27.41% return, which is significantly lower than CQQQ's -1.35% return.

IBIT

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -21.94%
• YTD: -27.41%
• 6M: -29.61%
• 1Y: -39.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CQQQ

• 1D: -1.27%
• 1M: -4.26%
• YTD: -1.35%
• 6M: -0.24%
• 1Y: 23.87%
• 3Y*: 8.01%
• 5Y*: -8.12%
• 10Y*: 5.36%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBIT vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IBIT iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF	-27.41%	-6.41%	89.87%
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF	-1.35%	34.96%	20.98%

Correlation

The correlation between IBIT and CQQQ is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.27

The correlation between IBIT and CQQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.27 (all time) to 0.38 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IBIT vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IBIT

IBIT Risk / Return Rank: 3
IBIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
IBIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
IBIT Omega Ratio Rank: 3
IBIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
IBIT Martin Ratio Rank: 2

CQQQ

CQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 22
CQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
CQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
CQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 23
CQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
CQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

IBIT vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) 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.

	IBIT	CQQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.92	0.71	-1.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.30	1.18	-2.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.14	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.78	0.87	-1.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.37	2.01	-3.38

IBIT vs. CQQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBIT Sharpe Ratio is -0.92, which is lower than the CQQQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBIT and CQQQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IBIT vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBIT drawdown since its inception was -52.11%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBIT and CQQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBIT	CQQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.11%	-73.99%	+21.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-52.11%	-24.41%	-27.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-35.93%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-66.96%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-49.45%	-51.07%	+1.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.53%	-28.32%	+11.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	29.64%	10.60%	+19.04%

Volatility

IBIT vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison

iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) has a higher volatility of 12.07% compared to Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) at 10.63%. This indicates that IBIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBIT	CQQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.07%	10.63%	+1.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.45%	22.55%	+11.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.10%	30.20%	+13.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	50.26%	38.09%	+12.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	50.26%	33.33%	+16.93%

IBIT vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBIT has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBIT vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison

IBIT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.20%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF	2.20%	2.17%	0.28%	0.55%	0.08%	0.00%	0.47%	0.01%	0.43%	1.41%	1.69%	1.77%
IBIT iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF	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

Can I hold both IBIT and CQQQ in my portfolio?

IBIT and CQQQ have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBIT or CQQQ?

IBIT has higher volatility (12.07%) compared to CQQQ (10.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBIT dropped -52.11% vs CQQQ's -73.99%.

Which ETF is better, IBIT or CQQQ?

On 1-year performance, CQQQ leads with 23.87% vs -39.67% for IBIT. On fees, IBIT is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, CQQQ has been the lower-risk option at 10.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBIT or CQQQ?

Over the 1-year period, CQQQ has performed better with a 23.87% return vs -39.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBIT or CQQQ?

IBIT is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for CQQQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBIT or CQQQ?

CQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.20%, compared with 0.00% for IBIT.

What is the main difference between IBIT and CQQQ?

IBIT is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while CQQQ is China Equities. IBIT tracks CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant, while CQQQ tracks FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for IBIT and 0.70% for CQQQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CQQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.71 vs -0.92), 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.