KWBE.L vs. CQQQ

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about KraneShares CSI China Internet UCITS ETF EUR (KWBE.L) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ).

KWBE.L and CQQQ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. KWBE.L is a passively managed fund by Waystone Management that tracks the performance of the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. It was launched on Sep 30, 2020. CQQQ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the AlphaShares China Technology Index. It was launched on Dec 8, 2009. Both KWBE.L and CQQQ are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in KraneShares CSI China Internet UCITS ETF EUR (KWBE.L) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
KWBE.L KraneShares CSI China Internet UCITS ETF EUR	-16.05%	10.85%	20.30%	-13.19%	-12.04%	-43.71%	8.17%
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF	-11.60%	18.95%	17.09%	-19.21%	-25.76%	-18.89%	14.59%

Different Trading Currencies

KWBE.L is traded in EUR, while CQQQ is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CQQQ values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KWBE.L achieves a -16.05% return, which is significantly lower than CQQQ's -11.60% return.

KWBE.L

• 1D: 1.24%
• 1M: -5.74%
• YTD: -16.05%
• 6M: -27.83%
• 1Y: -20.28%
• 3Y*: -1.72%
• 5Y*: -13.89%
• 10Y*: —

CQQQ

• 1D: -1.15%
• 1M: -6.48%
• YTD: -11.60%
• 6M: -22.40%
• 1Y: -2.67%
• 3Y*: -2.32%
• 5Y*: -10.71%
• 10Y*: 3.49%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

KWBE.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.

KWBE.L

KraneShares CSI China Internet UCITS ETF EUR

CQQQ

Invesco China Technology ETF

Return for Risk

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

KWBE.L

KWBE.L Risk / Return Rank: 2
KWBE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
KWBE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
KWBE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2
KWBE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
KWBE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1

CQQQ

CQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 14
CQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
CQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
CQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 15
CQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
CQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares CSI China Internet UCITS ETF EUR (KWBE.L) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). 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.

	KWBE.L	CQQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.72	-0.08	-0.63
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.92	0.11	-1.03
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.89	1.01	-0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.64	-0.12	-0.52
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.57	-0.28	-1.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KWBE.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.72, which is lower than the CQQQ Sharpe Ratio of -0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KWBE.L and CQQQ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KWBE.L	CQQQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.72	-0.08	-0.63
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.32	-0.30	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.27	0.21	-0.48

Correlation

The correlation between KWBE.L and CQQQ is 0.73, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison

KWBE.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.49%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KWBE.L KraneShares CSI China Internet UCITS ETF EUR	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF	2.49%	2.17%	0.28%	0.55%	0.08%	0.00%	0.47%	0.01%	0.43%	1.41%	1.69%	1.77%

Drawdowns

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KWBE.L drawdown since its inception was -76.64%, which is greater than CQQQ's maximum drawdown of -70.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KWBE.L and CQQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	KWBE.L	CQQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-76.64%	-73.99%	-2.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.06%	-24.41%	-5.65%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-70.40%	-67.04%	-3.36%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-65.26%	-56.93%	-8.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-59.68%	-28.06%	-31.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.26%	9.22%	+3.04%

Volatility

KWBE.L vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares CSI China Internet UCITS ETF EUR (KWBE.L) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) have volatilities of 8.57% and 8.90%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KWBE.L	CQQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.57%	8.90%	-0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.18%	20.62%	-3.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.18%	31.94%	-3.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	45.52%	36.25%	+9.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	45.88%	32.37%	+13.51%