LYMS.DE vs. CNDX.AS
Compare and contrast key facts about Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Acc (LYMS.DE) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.AS).
LYMS.DE and CNDX.AS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. LYMS.DE is a passively managed fund by Amundi that tracks the performance of the Nasdaq 100®. It was launched on Jan 17, 2019. CNDX.AS is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ-100 Index. It was launched on Jan 26, 2010. Both LYMS.DE and CNDX.AS are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: LYMS.DE or CNDX.AS.
Key characteristics
| LYMS.DE | CNDX.AS | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 30.83% | 31.61% |
| 1Y Return | 37.59% | 37.18% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 12.52% | 12.25% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 21.93% | 21.56% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 20.00% | 19.69% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.27 | 2.27 |
| Sortino Ratio | 3.01 | 2.97 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.42 | 1.42 |
| Calmar Ratio | 2.82 | 2.77 |
| Martin Ratio | 9.36 | 9.28 |
| Ulcer Index | 4.04% | 4.04% |
| Daily Std Dev | 16.55% | 16.46% |
| Max Drawdown | -50.00% | -31.21% |
| Current Drawdown | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between LYMS.DE and CNDX.AS is 0.98, 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.
Performance
LYMS.DE vs. CNDX.AS - Performance Comparison
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with LYMS.DE having a 30.83% return and CNDX.AS slightly higher at 31.61%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with LYMS.DE having a 20.00% annualized return and CNDX.AS not far behind at 19.69%. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
LYMS.DE vs. CNDX.AS - Expense Ratio Comparison
LYMS.DE has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.AS's 0.36% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
LYMS.DE vs. CNDX.AS - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Acc (LYMS.DE) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.AS). 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.
Dividends
LYMS.DE vs. CNDX.AS - Dividend Comparison
Neither LYMS.DE nor CNDX.AS has paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LYMS.DE Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.65% | 0.69% | 0.76% | 1.09% | 1.18% | 0.71% | 0.48% |
CNDX.AS iShares NASDAQ 100 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% |
Drawdowns
LYMS.DE vs. CNDX.AS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LYMS.DE drawdown since its inception was -50.00%, which is greater than CNDX.AS's maximum drawdown of -31.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LYMS.DE and CNDX.AS. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
LYMS.DE vs. CNDX.AS - Volatility Comparison
Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Acc (LYMS.DE) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.AS) have volatilities of 4.53% and 4.58%, 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.