PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IUMF.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IUMF.L (iShares Edge MSCI USA Momentum Factor UCITS ETF) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IUMF.L is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Index, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IUMF.L returned 15.74%/yr vs 19.03%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IUMF.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

IUMF.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI USA Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (IUMF.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

IUMF.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, IUMF.L achieves a 32.21% return, which is significantly higher than CNDX.L's 20.90% return.

IUMF.L

1D
1.91%
1M
18.47%
YTD
32.21%
6M
32.62%
1Y
43.66%
3Y*
29.81%
5Y*
15.74%
10Y*
—

CNDX.L

1D
0.16%
1M
11.63%
YTD
20.90%
6M
19.16%
1Y
42.84%
3Y*
25.37%
5Y*
19.03%
10Y*
22.74%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IUMF.L
iShares Edge MSCI USA Momentum Factor UCITS ETF		32.21%9.14%34.88%3.73%-8.43%14.11%25.03%23.31%2.39%24.77%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		20.90%11.22%28.66%48.50%-25.54%29.17%43.97%32.82%4.84%20.91%

Correlation

The correlation between IUMF.L and CNDX.L is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.78

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

0.83

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 18, 2016

0.78

The correlation between IUMF.L and CNDX.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (5 years) to 0.83 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors
IUMF.L
CNDX.L

Technology

42.9%
57.3%

Industrials

19.2%
2.8%

Healthcare

9.6%
3.8%

Financial Services

7.3%
0.2%

Communication Services

6.7%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
11.6%

Energy

2.5%
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.2%
6.9%

Basic Materials

1.9%
1.1%

Utilities

1.5%
1.3%

Real Estate

1.1%
0.1%

Technology

IUMF.L
42.9%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Industrials

IUMF.L
19.2%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Healthcare

IUMF.L
9.6%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Financial Services

IUMF.L
7.3%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Communication Services

IUMF.L
6.7%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IUMF.L
5.1%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Energy

IUMF.L
2.5%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

IUMF.L
2.2%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Basic Materials

IUMF.L
1.9%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Utilities

IUMF.L
1.5%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Real Estate

IUMF.L
1.1%
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 USA Momentum Factor UCITS ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with IUMF.L:
IUMF.L vs. IWFM.LIUMF.L vs. XDEM.LIUMF.L vs. JPLG.LIUMF.L vs. FSUS.LIUMF.L vs. IUMD.LIUMF.L vs. JMOMIUMF.L vs. QQQ
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

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IUMF.L
IUMF.L Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
IUMF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IUMF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
IUMF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
IUMF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
IUMF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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: 7474
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI USA Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (IUMF.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.

IUMF.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.43
2.68

-0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.40
3.58

-0.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.48

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.66

3.80

+0.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.06

10.82

+4.24

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

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

The current IUMF.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is comparable to the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IUMF.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

IUMF.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.43

2.68

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

0.95

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

1.12

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

1.18

-0.32

Drawdowns

IUMF.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IUMF.L drawdown since its inception was -25.23%, smaller than the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IUMF.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IUMF.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.23%

-27.74%

+2.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.32%

-11.11%

+1.79%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.56%

-24.37%

+1.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.37%

-27.74%

+3.37%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-27.74%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.44%

-4.72%

-1.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.89%

3.93%

-1.04%

Volatility

IUMF.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Edge MSCI USA Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (IUMF.L) has a higher volatility of 7.74% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) at 4.91%. This indicates that IUMF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IUMF.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.74%

4.91%

+2.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.98%

11.61%

+3.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.90%

15.81%

+2.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.27%

20.08%

-1.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.65%

20.20%

-1.55%

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

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

Dividends

IUMF.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IUMF.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%
IUMF.L
iShares Edge MSCI USA Momentum Factor 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

IUMF.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

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

IUMF.L is categorized as Momentum, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. IUMF.L tracks MSCI USA Momentum Index, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IUMF.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IUMF.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