PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWDA.L vs. CNX1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWDA.L (iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - IWDA.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Index (Net), while CNX1.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 21.54%/yr for CNX1.L. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWDA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for CNX1.L.

Performance

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.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 USD (Acc) (CNX1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IWDA.L is traded in USD, while CNX1.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CNX1.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWDA.L achieves a 9.83% return, which is significantly lower than CNX1.L's 19.55% return. Over the past 10 years, IWDA.L has underperformed CNX1.L with an annualized return of 13.07%, while CNX1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 21.54% 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%

CNX1.L

1D
-0.58%
1M
8.70%
YTD
19.55%
6M
19.30%
1Y
40.34%
3Y*
27.90%
5Y*
17.58%
10Y*
21.54%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.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%
CNX1.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		19.55%19.98%26.37%55.50%-33.49%28.32%47.63%38.99%-1.30%31.56%

Correlation

The correlation between IWDA.L and CNX1.L is 0.83, 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

0.83

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

0.83

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

0.85

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

0.82

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

0.75

The correlation between IWDA.L and CNX1.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.75 (all time) to 0.85 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWDA.L
CNX1.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%
CNX1.L
57.3%

Financial Services

IWDA.L
14.9%
CNX1.L
0.2%

Industrials

IWDA.L
9.7%
CNX1.L
2.8%

Communication Services

IWDA.L
9.3%
CNX1.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IWDA.L
8.8%
CNX1.L
11.6%

Healthcare

IWDA.L
8.6%
CNX1.L
3.8%

Consumer Defensive

IWDA.L
4.8%
CNX1.L
6.9%

Energy

IWDA.L
3.9%
CNX1.L
0.5%

Basic Materials

IWDA.L
2.8%
CNX1.L
1.1%

Utilities

IWDA.L
2.4%
CNX1.L
1.3%

Real Estate

IWDA.L
1.2%
CNX1.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 USD (Acc)

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 CNX1.L:
CNX1.L vs. CNDX.LCNX1.L vs. EQQQ.LCNX1.L vs. IITU.LCNX1.L vs. EQGB.LCNX1.L vs. QQQCNX1.L vs. XNAQ.LCNX1.L vs. SXRV.DE

Return for Risk

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.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
CNX1.L
CNX1.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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. CNX1.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 USD (Acc) (CNX1.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.LCNX1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.17
2.61

-0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.26
3.59

-0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.44

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.11

3.65

-0.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.16

13.38

-0.22

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. CNX1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is comparable to the CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWDA.L and CNX1.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.LCNX1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.17

2.61

-0.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

0.86

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.82

1.09

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

1.07

-0.27

Drawdowns

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWDA.L drawdown since its inception was -34.11%, roughly equal to the maximum CNX1.L drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWDA.L and CNX1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWDA.LCNX1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.11%

-35.21%

+1.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.31%

-10.99%

+2.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.94%

-23.11%

+6.17%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.88%

-35.21%

+9.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.11%

-35.21%

+1.10%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.43%

-0.77%

+0.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.44%

-5.19%

+0.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.97%

3.01%

-1.04%

Volatility

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.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 USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) has a volatility of 4.33%. This indicates that IWDA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNX1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWDA.LCNX1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.40%

4.33%

-0.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.19%

11.28%

-2.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.93%

15.39%

-3.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.68%

20.48%

-4.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.91%

19.91%

-4.00%

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWDA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CNX1.L's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWDA.L vs. CNX1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWDA.L nor CNX1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

IWDA.L and CNX1.L have a correlation of 0.83, 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 0.36% for CNX1.L.

IWDA.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CNX1.L is Nasdaq-100. IWDA.L tracks MSCI World Index (Net), while CNX1.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IWDA.L and 0.36% for CNX1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWDA.L and CNX1.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