PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IFSW.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IFSW.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Multifactor UCITS) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IFSW.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IFSW.L returned 11.66%/yr vs 21.62%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IFSW.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

IFSW.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFSW.L achieves a 11.85% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 19.65% return. Over the past 10 years, IFSW.L has underperformed CNDX.L with an annualized return of 11.66%, while CNDX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 21.62% annualized return.

IFSW.L

1D
-0.50%
1M
4.97%
YTD
11.85%
6M
13.13%
1Y
29.64%
3Y*
21.77%
5Y*
10.89%
10Y*
11.66%

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

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IFSW.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Multifactor UCITS		11.85%25.73%17.05%15.35%-15.39%20.36%10.69%21.44%-12.34%26.45%
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 IFSW.L and CNDX.L 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.83

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

0.81

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

0.82

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

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 9, 2015

0.80

The correlation between IFSW.L and CNDX.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
IFSW.L
CNDX.L

Technology

31.9%
57.3%

Financial Services

19.3%
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

10.7%
11.6%

Communication Services

8.0%
14.5%

Healthcare

7.7%
3.8%

Industrials

7.3%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

5.7%
6.9%

Energy

3.9%
0.5%

Basic Materials

2.2%
1.1%

Utilities

2.1%
1.3%

Real Estate

0.9%
0.1%

Technology

IFSW.L
31.9%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Financial Services

IFSW.L
19.3%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

IFSW.L
10.7%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Communication Services

IFSW.L
8.0%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Healthcare

IFSW.L
7.7%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Industrials

IFSW.L
7.3%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

IFSW.L
5.7%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Energy

IFSW.L
3.9%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Basic Materials

IFSW.L
2.2%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Utilities

IFSW.L
2.1%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Real Estate

IFSW.L
0.9%
CNDX.L
0.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Edge MSCI World Multifactor UCITS

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with IFSW.L:
IFSW.L vs. JPGL.DEIFSW.L vs. GERD.DEIFSW.L vs. HWWD.LIFSW.L vs. JPGL.LIFSW.L vs. VOOIFSW.L vs. IWDA.LIFSW.L vs. QWLD
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

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IFSW.L
IFSW.L Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
IFSW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IFSW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
IFSW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
IFSW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
IFSW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI World Multifactor UCITS (IFSW.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.

IFSW.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.40
2.52

-0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.63
3.50

+0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.43

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.69

3.61

+0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.61

13.03

+2.58

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

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

The current IFSW.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFSW.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

IFSW.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.40

2.52

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

0.84

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.72

1.07

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.70

1.12

-0.42

Drawdowns

IFSW.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFSW.L drawdown since its inception was -34.49%, roughly equal to the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -35.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFSW.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IFSW.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.49%

-35.17%

+0.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.99%

-11.00%

+3.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.98%

-22.44%

+6.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.41%

-35.17%

+10.76%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.49%

-35.17%

+0.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.00%

-0.76%

-0.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.12%

-5.30%

+0.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.89%

3.07%

-1.18%

Volatility

IFSW.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI World Multifactor UCITS (IFSW.L) is 3.52%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 4.90%. This indicates that IFSW.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

IFSW.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.52%

4.90%

-1.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.54%

11.88%

-2.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.29%

15.79%

-3.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.76%

20.87%

-5.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.19%

20.07%

-3.88%

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

IFSW.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFSW.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IFSW.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%
IFSW.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Multifactor UCITS		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

IFSW.L and CNDX.L 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, 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 0.55% for IFSW.L.

IFSW.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. IFSW.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for IFSW.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IFSW.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