PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IWDA.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWDA.L (iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWDA.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Index (Net), while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWDA.L returned 13.07%/yr vs 21.62%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWDA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

IWDA.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.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, IWDA.L achieves a 9.83% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 19.65% return. Over the past 10 years, IWDA.L has underperformed CNDX.L with an annualized return of 13.07%, while CNDX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 21.62% annualized return.

IWDA.L

1D
0.10%
1M
4.07%
YTD
9.83%
6M
10.98%
1Y
25.98%
3Y*
20.77%
5Y*
11.86%
10Y*
13.07%

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)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWDA.L
iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		9.83%21.03%19.11%24.27%-18.11%22.19%16.06%27.13%-9.01%22.77%
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 IWDA.L and CNDX.L is 0.88, 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

0.88

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

0.88

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

0.89

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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2010

0.78

The correlation between IWDA.L and CNDX.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (all time) to 0.89 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors
IWDA.L
CNDX.L

Technology

32.9%
57.3%

Financial Services

14.9%
0.2%

Industrials

9.7%
2.8%

Communication Services

9.3%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
11.6%

Healthcare

8.6%
3.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.8%
6.9%

Energy

3.9%
0.5%

Basic Materials

2.8%
1.1%

Utilities

2.4%
1.3%

Real Estate

1.2%
0.1%

Technology

IWDA.L
32.9%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Financial Services

IWDA.L
14.9%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Industrials

IWDA.L
9.7%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Communication Services

IWDA.L
9.3%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IWDA.L
8.8%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Healthcare

IWDA.L
8.6%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Consumer Defensive

IWDA.L
4.8%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Energy

IWDA.L
3.9%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Basic Materials

IWDA.L
2.8%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Utilities

IWDA.L
2.4%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Real Estate

IWDA.L
1.2%
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 Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with IWDA.L:
IWDA.L vs. VWCE.DEIWDA.L vs. SWDA.LIWDA.L vs. VWRP.LIWDA.L vs. VUAA.LIWDA.L vs. URTHIWDA.L vs. ACWI.LIWDA.L vs. SPY
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

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWDA.L
IWDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.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.

IWDA.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.17
2.52

-0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.26
3.50

-0.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.43

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.11

3.61

-0.50

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.16

13.03

+0.13

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

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

The current IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is comparable to the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWDA.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

IWDA.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.17

2.52

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

0.84

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.82

1.07

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

1.12

-0.33

Drawdowns

IWDA.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWDA.L drawdown since its inception was -34.11%, roughly equal to the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -35.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWDA.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWDA.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.11%

-35.17%

+1.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.31%

-11.00%

+2.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.94%

-22.44%

+5.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.88%

-35.17%

+9.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.11%

-35.17%

+1.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.43%

-0.76%

+0.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.44%

-5.30%

+0.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.97%

3.07%

-1.10%

Volatility

IWDA.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L) is 3.40%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 4.90%. This indicates that IWDA.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

IWDA.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.40%

4.90%

-1.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.19%

11.88%

-2.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.93%

15.79%

-3.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.68%

20.87%

-5.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.91%

20.07%

-4.16%

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

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

Dividends

IWDA.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWDA.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%
IWDA.L
iShares Core MSCI World 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

IWDA.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

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

IWDA.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. IWDA.L tracks MSCI World Index (Net), while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IWDA.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWDA.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