PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MVOL.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MVOL.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MVOL.L returned 7.05%/yr vs 21.62%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MVOL.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS (MVOL.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MVOL.L achieves a 0.67% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 19.65% return. Over the past 10 years, MVOL.L has underperformed CNDX.L with an annualized return of 7.05%, while CNDX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 21.62% annualized return.

MVOL.L

1D
0.04%
1M
0.76%
YTD
0.67%
6M
1.44%
1Y
1.44%
3Y*
9.30%
5Y*
5.18%
10Y*
7.05%

CNDX.L

1D
-0.66%
1M
8.52%
YTD
19.65%
6M
19.10%
1Y
40.28%
3Y*
27.98%
5Y*
17.61%
10Y*
21.62%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MVOL.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS		0.67%11.02%11.08%7.28%-9.62%14.65%2.56%22.56%-2.40%17.41%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		19.65%19.75%26.45%56.31%-33.45%27.96%48.33%38.07%-1.03%32.36%

Correlation

The correlation between MVOL.L and CNDX.L is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.16

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

0.30

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

0.51

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2012

0.60

Over the past year, the correlation between MVOL.L and CNDX.L has dropped to 0.16 - well below their long-term average of 0.60, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
MVOL.L
CNDX.L

Technology

20.1%
57.3%

Financial Services

14.0%
0.2%

Healthcare

13.8%
3.8%

Communication Services

12.1%
14.5%

Consumer Defensive

10.9%
6.9%

Industrials

9.2%
2.8%

Utilities

8.0%
1.3%

Consumer Cyclical

5.6%
11.6%

Energy

4.5%
0.5%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.1%

Real Estate

0.7%
0.1%

Technology

MVOL.L
20.1%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Financial Services

MVOL.L
14.0%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Healthcare

MVOL.L
13.8%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Communication Services

MVOL.L
12.1%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Consumer Defensive

MVOL.L
10.9%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Industrials

MVOL.L
9.2%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Utilities

MVOL.L
8.0%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Consumer Cyclical

MVOL.L
5.6%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Energy

MVOL.L
4.5%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Basic Materials

MVOL.L
1.1%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Real Estate

MVOL.L
0.7%
CNDX.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 Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with MVOL.L:
MVOL.L vs. ACWVMVOL.L vs. IWDA.LMVOL.L vs. XDEB.DEMVOL.L vs. VOOMVOL.L vs. XDEM.LMVOL.L vs. USMVMVOL.L vs. SLXX.L
Often compared with CNDX.L:
CNDX.L vs. QQQCNDX.L vs. EQQQ.DECNDX.L vs. SXRV.DECNDX.L vs. CNX1.LCNDX.L vs. CSPX.LCNDX.L vs. EQQU.LCNDX.L vs. VWRA.L

Return for Risk

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MVOL.L
MVOL.L Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
MVOL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
CNDX.L
CNDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS (MVOL.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.

MVOL.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.19
2.52

-2.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.31
3.50

-3.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.43

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.25

3.61

-3.36

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.61

13.03

-12.42

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MVOL.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.19, which is lower than the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MVOL.L and CNDX.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

MVOL.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.19

2.52

-2.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

0.84

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

1.07

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.73

1.12

-0.39

Drawdowns

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MVOL.L drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, smaller than the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -35.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVOL.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MVOL.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.82%

-35.17%

+6.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.78%

-11.00%

+5.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.14%

-22.44%

+14.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.52%

-35.17%

+16.65%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.82%

-35.17%

+6.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.86%

-0.76%

-3.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.34%

-5.30%

+1.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.36%

3.07%

-0.71%

Volatility

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS (MVOL.L) is 2.01%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 4.90%. This indicates that MVOL.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MVOL.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.01%

4.90%

-2.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.58%

11.88%

-6.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.74%

15.79%

-8.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.64%

20.87%

-10.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.65%

20.07%

-8.42%

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MVOL.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

MVOL.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MVOL.L nor CNDX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.02%0.05%0.06%0.03%0.04%0.07%0.06%0.30%0.16%0.16%
MVOL.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

MVOL.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CNDX.L is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CNDX.L is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for MVOL.L.

MVOL.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. MVOL.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MVOL.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MVOL.L and CNDX.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