LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LQQ.PA (Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage) and DCAM.PA (Amundi PEA Monde (MSCI World) UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - LQQ.PA is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Nasdaq 100® Leverage (2x) index, while DCAM.PA is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, LQQ.PA returned 79.18% vs 22.78% for DCAM.PA. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LQQ.PA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for DCAM.PA.

Performance

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage (LQQ.PA) and Amundi PEA Monde (MSCI World) UCITS ETF Acc (DCAM.PA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LQQ.PA achieves a 39.94% return, which is significantly higher than DCAM.PA's 10.98% return.

LQQ.PA

• 1D: -1.38%
• 1M: 17.97%
• YTD: 39.94%
• 6M: 36.85%
• 1Y: 79.18%
• 3Y*: 44.82%
• 5Y*: 26.89%
• 10Y*: 35.63%

DCAM.PA

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 4.83%
• YTD: 10.98%
• 6M: 11.26%
• 1Y: 22.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LQQ.PA Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage	39.94%	47.41%
DCAM.PA Amundi PEA Monde (MSCI World) UCITS ETF Acc	10.98%	15.54%

Correlation

The correlation between LQQ.PA and DCAM.PA is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 12, 2025	0.88

The correlation between LQQ.PA and DCAM.PA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA — Risk / Return Rank

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

LQQ.PA

LQQ.PA Risk / Return Rank: 71
LQQ.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
LQQ.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
LQQ.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 69
LQQ.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
LQQ.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 63

DCAM.PA

DCAM.PA Risk / Return Rank: 67
DCAM.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
DCAM.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
DCAM.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 66
DCAM.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
DCAM.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage (LQQ.PA) and Amundi PEA Monde (MSCI World) UCITS ETF Acc (DCAM.PA). 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.

	LQQ.PA	DCAM.PA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.54	2.07	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.12	2.90	+0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.39	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	3.44	+0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.13	13.80	-2.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQQ.PA Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is comparable to the DCAM.PA Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQQ.PA and DCAM.PA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LQQ.PA	DCAM.PA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.54	2.07	+0.47
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.90	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	1.46	-0.76

Drawdowns

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQQ.PA drawdown since its inception was -75.86%, which is greater than DCAM.PA's maximum drawdown of -15.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQQ.PA and DCAM.PA.

Drawdown Indicators

	LQQ.PA	DCAM.PA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.86%	-15.45%	-60.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.88%	-6.54%	-15.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-44.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-61.21%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.21%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.38%	-0.33%	-1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.73%	-1.72%	-14.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.05%	1.64%	+5.41%

Volatility

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage (LQQ.PA) has a higher volatility of 9.10% compared to Amundi PEA Monde (MSCI World) UCITS ETF Acc (DCAM.PA) at 2.63%. This indicates that LQQ.PA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DCAM.PA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LQQ.PA	DCAM.PA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.10%	2.63%	+6.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.37%	7.62%	+14.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.71%	10.89%	+19.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	39.78%	15.20%	+24.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	38.87%	15.20%	+23.67%

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQQ.PA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than DCAM.PA's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

LQQ.PA vs. DCAM.PA - Dividend Comparison

Neither LQQ.PA nor DCAM.PA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LQQ.PA and DCAM.PA in my portfolio?

LQQ.PA and DCAM.PA have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LQQ.PA or DCAM.PA?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, LQQ.PA or DCAM.PA?

DCAM.PA is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for LQQ.PA.

What is the main difference between LQQ.PA and DCAM.PA?

LQQ.PA is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while DCAM.PA is Global Equities. LQQ.PA tracks Nasdaq 100® Leverage (2x) index, while DCAM.PA tracks MSCI World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for LQQ.PA and 0.20% for DCAM.PA.