PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IMV.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IMV.L (iShares Edge MSCI Europe Min Volatility UCITS) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMV.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Europe NR EUR, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IMV.L returned 7.68%/yr vs 22.61%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IMV.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

IMV.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI Europe Min Volatility UCITS (IMV.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

IMV.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, IMV.L achieves a 4.72% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.90% return. Over the past 10 years, IMV.L has underperformed CNDX.L with an annualized return of 7.68%, while CNDX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 22.61% annualized return.

IMV.L

1D
0.51%
1M
1.21%
YTD
4.72%
6M
5.90%
1Y
8.30%
3Y*
10.49%
5Y*
7.54%
10Y*
7.68%

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)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMV.L
iShares Edge MSCI Europe Min Volatility UCITS		4.72%17.66%6.63%8.56%-7.83%13.68%1.50%16.37%-2.91%13.29%
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 IMV.L and CNDX.L is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.14

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

0.22

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

0.36

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

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2013

0.53

Over the past year, the correlation between IMV.L and CNDX.L has dropped to 0.14 - well below their long-term average of 0.53, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

Sectors
IMV.L
CNDX.L

Financial Services

17.9%
0.2%

Industrials

15.4%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

13.1%
6.9%

Healthcare

13.0%
3.8%

Utilities

10.2%
1.3%

Communication Services

9.6%
14.5%

Energy

7.1%
0.5%

Basic Materials

5.6%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

3.6%
11.6%

Technology

2.8%
57.3%

Real Estate

1.6%
0.1%

Financial Services

IMV.L
17.9%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Industrials

IMV.L
15.4%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

IMV.L
13.1%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Healthcare

IMV.L
13.0%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Utilities

IMV.L
10.2%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Communication Services

IMV.L
9.6%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Energy

IMV.L
7.1%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Basic Materials

IMV.L
5.6%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IMV.L
3.6%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Technology

IMV.L
2.8%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Real Estate

IMV.L
1.6%
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 Europe Min Volatility UCITS

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with IMV.L:
IMV.L vs. MIVO.LIMV.L vs. SPYIMV.L vs. MINV.LIMV.L vs. XDEQ.LIMV.L vs. MVUS.LIMV.L vs. UB06.LIMV.L vs. CSWG.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

IMV.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IMV.L
IMV.L Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
IMV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
IMV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI Europe Min Volatility UCITS (IMV.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.

IMV.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.91
2.66

-1.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.27
3.56

-2.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.47

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.97

3.77

-2.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.92

10.74

-7.81

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

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

The current IMV.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.91, which is lower than the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMV.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

IMV.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.91

2.66

-1.76

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

0.94

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

1.12

-0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.71

1.17

-0.46

Drawdowns

IMV.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMV.L drawdown since its inception was -24.48%, smaller than the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMV.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IMV.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.48%

-27.74%

+3.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.50%

-11.11%

+2.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.50%

-24.37%

+15.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.42%

-27.74%

+10.32%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.48%

-27.74%

+3.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.62%

0.00%

-4.62%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.57%

-4.72%

+1.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.83%

3.93%

-1.10%

Volatility

IMV.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI Europe Min Volatility UCITS (IMV.L) is 2.89%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 4.87%. This indicates that IMV.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

IMV.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.89%

4.87%

-1.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.71%

11.61%

-3.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.13%

15.74%

-6.61%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.97%

20.08%

-9.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.31%

20.20%

-7.89%

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

IMV.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMV.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IMV.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%
IMV.L
iShares Edge MSCI Europe Min Volatility 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

IMV.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IMV.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IMV.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

IMV.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. IMV.L tracks MSCI Europe NR EUR, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for IMV.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IMV.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