PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IUSF.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IUSF.L (iShares Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IUSF.L is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell Mid Cap TR USD, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IUSF.L returned 7.45%/yr vs 19.03%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IUSF.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

IUSF.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

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

IUSF.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, IUSF.L achieves a 7.69% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.90% return.

IUSF.L

1D
0.64%
1M
4.37%
YTD
7.69%
6M
7.96%
1Y
17.90%
3Y*
11.63%
5Y*
7.45%
10Y*
—

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)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IUSF.L
iShares Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF		7.69%1.00%14.60%10.79%-8.57%27.74%13.62%23.94%-5.85%7.91%
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 IUSF.L and CNDX.L is 0.52, 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

0.52

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

0.56

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

0.65

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

0.68

The correlation between IUSF.L and CNDX.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.68 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors
IUSF.L
CNDX.L

Technology

21.2%
57.3%

Industrials

16.5%
2.8%

Financial Services

12.4%
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.9%
11.6%

Healthcare

9.3%
3.8%

Real Estate

7.1%
0.1%

Utilities

6.3%
1.3%

Consumer Defensive

5.7%
6.9%

Basic Materials

5.3%
1.1%

Communication Services

3.9%
14.5%

Energy

2.3%
0.5%

Technology

IUSF.L
21.2%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Industrials

IUSF.L
16.5%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Financial Services

IUSF.L
12.4%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

IUSF.L
9.9%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Healthcare

IUSF.L
9.3%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Real Estate

IUSF.L
7.1%
CNDX.L
0.1%

Utilities

IUSF.L
6.3%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Consumer Defensive

IUSF.L
5.7%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Basic Materials

IUSF.L
5.3%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Communication Services

IUSF.L
3.9%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Energy

IUSF.L
2.3%
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 Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with IUSF.L:
IUSF.L vs. VTIIUSF.L vs. VUAA.LIUSF.L vs. VOOIUSF.L vs. IJHIUSF.L vs. ^SP500TRIUSF.L vs. VGTIUSF.L vs. CNX1.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

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IUSF.L
IUSF.L Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
IUSF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IUSF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
IUSF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
IUSF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
IUSF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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.

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

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

IUSF.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.59
2.66

-1.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.21
3.56

-1.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.47

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.41

3.77

-1.36

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.40

10.74

-3.34

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

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

The current IUSF.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is lower than the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IUSF.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

IUSF.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.59

2.66

-1.08

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

0.94

-0.48

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

1.12

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

1.17

-0.62

Drawdowns

IUSF.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IUSF.L drawdown since its inception was -33.67%, which is greater than CNDX.L's maximum drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IUSF.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IUSF.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.67%

-27.74%

-5.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.39%

-11.11%

+3.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.73%

-24.37%

+1.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.73%

-27.74%

+5.01%

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

-5.45%

-4.72%

-0.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.41%

3.93%

-1.52%

Volatility

IUSF.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI USA Size Factor UCITS ETF (IUSF.L) is 2.67%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 4.87%. This indicates that IUSF.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

IUSF.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.67%

4.87%

-2.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.66%

11.61%

-3.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.24%

15.74%

-4.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.95%

20.08%

-4.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.36%

20.20%

-2.84%

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

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

Dividends

IUSF.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IUSF.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%
IUSF.L
iShares Edge MSCI USA Size 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

IUSF.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

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

IUSF.L is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. IUSF.L tracks Russell Mid Cap TR USD, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IUSF.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IUSF.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