MIDD.L vs. CNDX.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares FTSE 250 UCITS ETF (MIDD.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L).
MIDD.L and CNDX.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. MIDD.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the FTSE 250 Ex Investment Trust TR GBP. It was launched on Mar 26, 2004. CNDX.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ-100 Index. It was launched on Jan 26, 2010. Both MIDD.L and CNDX.L 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: MIDD.L or CNDX.L.
Key characteristics
| MIDD.L | CNDX.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 6.02% | 25.03% |
| 1Y Return | 16.59% | 36.49% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -2.15% | 9.66% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 2.29% | 21.17% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 5.02% | 18.14% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.02 | 2.03 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.49 | 2.75 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.18 | 1.37 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.62 | 2.69 |
| Martin Ratio | 5.06 | 9.45 |
| Ulcer Index | 2.49% | 3.50% |
| Daily Std Dev | 12.81% | 16.32% |
| Max Drawdown | -51.66% | -35.17% |
| Current Drawdown | -8.85% | -0.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between MIDD.L and CNDX.L is 0.56, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
MIDD.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, MIDD.L achieves a 6.02% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 25.03% return. Over the past 10 years, MIDD.L has underperformed CNDX.L with an annualized return of 5.02%, while CNDX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 18.14% annualized return. 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.
MIDD.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
MIDD.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
MIDD.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares FTSE 250 UCITS ETF (MIDD.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.
Dividends
MIDD.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison
MIDD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.13%, more than CNDX.L's 0.02% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MIDD.L iShares FTSE 250 UCITS ETF | 3.13% | 3.17% | 2.76% | 2.01% | 1.51% | 2.72% | 3.07% | 2.80% | 2.67% | 2.80% | 2.54% | 2.25% |
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 0.02% | 0.05% | 0.06% | 0.03% | 0.04% | 0.07% | 0.06% | 0.30% | 0.16% | 0.16% | 0.19% | 0.16% |
Drawdowns
MIDD.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MIDD.L drawdown since its inception was -51.66%, which is greater than CNDX.L's maximum drawdown of -35.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MIDD.L and CNDX.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
MIDD.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares FTSE 250 UCITS ETF (MIDD.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) have volatilities of 4.78% and 4.84%, 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.