IMSU.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IMSU.L (iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMSU.L is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IMSU.L returned 6.03%/yr vs 18.88%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IMSU.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

IMSU.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IMSU.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

IMSU.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, IMSU.L achieves a 12.66% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.14% return.

IMSU.L

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: 1.79%
• YTD: 12.66%
• 6M: 15.92%
• 1Y: 19.35%
• 3Y*: 8.18%
• 5Y*: 6.03%
• 10Y*: —

CNDX.L

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: 8.19%
• YTD: 20.14%
• 6M: 17.88%
• 1Y: 40.89%
• 3Y*: 24.77%
• 5Y*: 18.88%
• 10Y*: 22.53%

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IMSU.L iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	12.66%	3.37%	0.69%	6.26%	-1.35%	28.63%	16.34%	19.09%	-10.83%	10.05%
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	20.10%	11.22%	28.66%	48.50%	-25.54%	29.17%	43.97%	32.82%	4.84%	12.25%

Correlation

The correlation between IMSU.L and CNDX.L is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.36
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2017	0.51

Over the past year, the correlation between IMSU.L and CNDX.L has dropped to 0.29 - well below their long-term average of 0.51, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

Sectors	IMSU.L	CNDX.L
Basic Materials	91.4%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	11.6%
Communication Services	-	14.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.9%
Energy	-	0.5%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	3.8%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	57.3%
Utilities	-	1.3%

Return for Risk

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

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

IMSU.L

IMSU.L Risk / Return Rank: 37
IMSU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
IMSU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
IMSU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 35
IMSU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
IMSU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 39

CNDX.L

CNDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 75
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 74
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IMSU.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.

	IMSU.L	CNDX.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.31	2.61	-1.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	3.49	-1.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.46	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.79	3.70	-1.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.00	10.51	-4.51
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current IMSU.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.31, which is lower than the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMSU.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IMSU.L	CNDX.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.31	2.61	-1.29
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	0.94	-0.57
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.47	1.17	-0.70

Drawdowns

IMSU.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMSU.L drawdown since its inception was -28.25%, roughly equal to the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMSU.L and CNDX.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMSU.L	CNDX.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.25%	-27.74%	-0.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.76%	-11.11%	+0.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.70%	-24.37%	+2.67%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.70%	-27.74%	+6.04%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-27.74%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.35%	-0.66%	-2.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.55%	-4.72%	-0.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.22%	3.93%	-0.71%

Volatility

IMSU.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IMSU.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) have volatilities of 4.89% and 4.89%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	IMSU.L	CNDX.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.89%	4.89%	0.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.86%	11.60%	+0.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.68%	15.74%	-1.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.33%	20.08%	-3.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.46%	20.20%	-1.74%

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

IMSU.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMSU.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IMSU.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%
IMSU.L iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector 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

Can I hold both IMSU.L and CNDX.L in my portfolio?

IMSU.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IMSU.L or CNDX.L?

On fees, IMSU.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMSU.L or CNDX.L?

IMSU.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

What is the main difference between IMSU.L and CNDX.L?

IMSU.L is categorized as Materials, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. IMSU.L tracks MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IMSU.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.