NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE
NQSE.DE (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) and LCUJ.DE (Amundi MSCI Japan UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - NQSE.DE is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while LCUJ.DE is a Japan Equities fund tracking the MSCI Japan. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, NQSE.DE returned 14.04%/yr vs 9.91%/yr for LCUJ.DE. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NQSE.DE charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for LCUJ.DE.
Performance
NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NQSE.DE achieves a 15.12% return, which is significantly lower than LCUJ.DE's 16.17% return.
NQSE.DE
- 1D
- 3.16%
- 1M
- 1.35%
- YTD
- 15.12%
- 6M
- 16.84%
- 1Y
- 33.33%
- 3Y*
- 23.70%
- 5Y*
- 14.04%
- 10Y*
- —
LCUJ.DE
- 1D
- 2.45%
- 1M
- 2.12%
- YTD
- 16.17%
- 6M
- 16.60%
- 1Y
- 31.88%
- 3Y*
- 14.15%
- 5Y*
- 9.91%
- 10Y*
- —
NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NQSE.DE iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 15.12% | 18.19% | 24.02% | 52.15% | -36.27% | 27.38% | 45.18% | 35.63% | -15.97% |
LCUJ.DE Amundi MSCI Japan UCITS ETF Acc | 16.17% | 12.72% | 13.58% | 16.52% | -12.47% | 10.03% | 5.07% | 22.41% | -8.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between NQSE.DE and LCUJ.DE is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2018 | 0.52 |
The correlation between NQSE.DE and LCUJ.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE — Risk / Return Rank
NQSE.DE
LCUJ.DE
NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (NQSE.DE) and Amundi MSCI Japan UCITS ETF Acc (LCUJ.DE). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| NQSE.DE | LCUJ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.31 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.73 | 3.11 | -0.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.34 | 9.95 | -0.61 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NQSE.DE drawdown since its inception was -37.62%, smaller than the maximum LCUJ.DE drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NQSE.DE and LCUJ.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NQSE.DE | LCUJ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.62% | -99.38% | +61.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.88% | -10.06% | -1.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.41% | -16.93% | -5.48% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.62% | -19.11% | -18.51% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.08% | -98.52% | +95.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.55% | -98.36% | +89.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.49% | 3.15% | +0.34% |
Volatility
NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE - Volatility Comparison
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (NQSE.DE) has a higher volatility of 6.10% compared to Amundi MSCI Japan UCITS ETF Acc (LCUJ.DE) at 4.47%. This indicates that NQSE.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LCUJ.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NQSE.DE | LCUJ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.10% | 4.47% | +1.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.93% | 15.34% | -2.41% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.74% | 19.13% | -2.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.02% | 16.70% | +4.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.60% | 38.41% | -16.81% |
NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
NQSE.DE has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than LCUJ.DE's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
NQSE.DE vs. LCUJ.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither NQSE.DE nor LCUJ.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
NQSE.DE and LCUJ.DE have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LCUJ.DE is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LCUJ.DE is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for NQSE.DE.
NQSE.DE is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while LCUJ.DE is Japan Equities. NQSE.DE tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while LCUJ.DE tracks MSCI Japan. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for NQSE.DE and 0.12% for LCUJ.DE.
Find the right allocation for NQSE.DE and LCUJ.DE
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