PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IESG.L vs. CNDX.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IESG.L (iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IESG.L is a ESG fund tracking the MSCI Europe SRI Select Reduced Fossil Fuel Index, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IESG.L returned 8.90%/yr vs 22.61%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IESG.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF (IESG.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IESG.L is traded in GBp, while CNDX.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CNDX.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IESG.L achieves a 6.07% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.90% return. Over the past 10 years, IESG.L has underperformed CNDX.L with an annualized return of 8.90%, while CNDX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 22.61% annualized return.

IESG.L

1D
0.99%
1M
3.90%
YTD
6.07%
6M
7.58%
1Y
8.35%
3Y*
7.12%
5Y*
5.54%
10Y*
8.90%

CNDX.L

1D
0.00%
1M
10.21%
YTD
20.90%
6M
19.02%
1Y
42.53%
3Y*
25.03%
5Y*
19.03%
10Y*
22.61%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IESG.L
iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF		6.07%8.44%0.88%14.27%-9.89%18.85%9.51%22.59%-6.20%15.83%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		20.14%11.22%28.66%48.50%-25.54%29.17%43.97%32.82%4.84%20.91%

Correlation

The correlation between IESG.L and CNDX.L is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.50

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

0.51

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

0.56

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2011

0.59

The correlation between IESG.L and CNDX.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (1 year) to 0.61 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IESG.L
CNDX.L

Financial Services

23.1%
0.2%

Industrials

20.5%
2.8%

Healthcare

13.4%
3.8%

Technology

12.5%
57.3%

Consumer Defensive

9.4%
6.9%

Consumer Cyclical

6.6%
11.6%

Basic Materials

5.3%
1.1%

Utilities

4.2%
1.3%

Communication Services

3.7%
14.5%

Real Estate

1.4%
0.1%

Energy

-

0.5%

Financial Services

IESG.L
23.1%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Industrials

IESG.L
20.5%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Healthcare

IESG.L
13.4%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Technology

IESG.L
12.5%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Consumer Defensive

IESG.L
9.4%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Consumer Cyclical

IESG.L
6.6%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Basic Materials

IESG.L
5.3%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Utilities

IESG.L
4.2%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Communication Services

IESG.L
3.7%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Real Estate

IESG.L
1.4%
CNDX.L
0.1%

Energy

IESG.L

-

CNDX.L
0.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with IESG.L:
IESG.L vs. ZPDX.DEIESG.L vs. SUUS.LIESG.L vs. SMEA.LIESG.L vs. VEAIESG.L vs. CSPX.LIESG.L vs. SPYIESG.L vs. CSX5.L
Often compared with CNDX.L:
CNDX.L vs. QQQCNDX.L vs. EQQQ.DECNDX.L vs. SXRV.DECNDX.L vs. CNX1.LCNDX.L vs. CSPX.LCNDX.L vs. EQQU.LCNDX.L vs. VWRA.L

Return for Risk

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IESG.L
IESG.L Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
IESG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IESG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
IESG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
IESG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
IESG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank
CNDX.L
CNDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF (IESG.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.

IESG.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.65
2.66

-2.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.00
3.56

-2.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.12

1.47

-0.35

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.73

3.77

-3.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.41

10.74

-8.33

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

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IESG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.65, which is lower than the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IESG.L and CNDX.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

IESG.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.65

2.66

-2.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.39

0.94

-0.55

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

1.12

-0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.51

1.17

-0.66

Drawdowns

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IESG.L drawdown since its inception was -25.95%, smaller than the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IESG.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IESG.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.95%

-27.74%

+1.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.32%

-11.11%

-0.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.07%

-24.37%

+9.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.77%

-27.74%

+6.97%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.95%

-27.74%

+1.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.72%

-4.72%

0.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.46%

3.93%

-0.47%

Volatility

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF (IESG.L) is 3.93%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 4.87%. This indicates that IESG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IESG.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.93%

4.87%

-0.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.43%

11.61%

-1.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.75%

15.74%

-2.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.15%

20.08%

-5.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.84%

20.20%

-5.36%

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IESG.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

IESG.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IESG.L nor CNDX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
IESG.L
iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS 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

IESG.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IESG.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IESG.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

IESG.L is categorized as ESG, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. IESG.L tracks MSCI Europe SRI Select Reduced Fossil Fuel Index, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IESG.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IESG.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