PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

OMXS.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

OMXS.L (iShares OMX Stockholm Capped UCITS ETF) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OMXS.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Sweden NR SEK, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, OMXS.L returned 5.61%/yr vs 19.03%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. OMXS.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

OMXS.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares OMX Stockholm Capped UCITS ETF (OMXS.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

OMXS.L is traded in GBp, while CNDX.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CNDX.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OMXS.L achieves a 7.63% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.90% return.

OMXS.L

1D
-0.06%
1M
2.48%
YTD
7.63%
6M
11.31%
1Y
25.52%
3Y*
14.59%
5Y*
5.61%
10Y*
—

CNDX.L

1D
0.00%
1M
10.21%
YTD
20.90%
6M
19.02%
1Y
42.53%
3Y*
25.03%
5Y*
19.03%
10Y*
22.61%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
OMXS.L
iShares OMX Stockholm Capped UCITS ETF		7.63%26.09%-0.34%14.97%-21.16%24.41%24.04%20.97%-7.16%10.84%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		20.14%11.22%28.66%48.50%-25.54%29.17%43.97%32.82%4.84%20.91%

Correlation

The correlation between OMXS.L and CNDX.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.45

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

0.43

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

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2016

0.56

The correlation between OMXS.L and CNDX.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (3 years) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors
OMXS.L
CNDX.L

Industrials

44.3%
2.8%

Financial Services

24.1%
0.2%

Healthcare

6.7%
3.8%

Technology

6.4%
57.3%

Consumer Cyclical

4.4%
11.6%

Basic Materials

4.2%
1.1%

Real Estate

3.6%
0.1%

Communication Services

3.3%
14.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
6.9%

Energy

0.1%
0.5%

Utilities

0.0%
1.3%

Industrials

OMXS.L
44.3%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Financial Services

OMXS.L
24.1%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Healthcare

OMXS.L
6.7%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Technology

OMXS.L
6.4%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Consumer Cyclical

OMXS.L
4.4%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Basic Materials

OMXS.L
4.2%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Real Estate

OMXS.L
3.6%
CNDX.L
0.1%

Communication Services

OMXS.L
3.3%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Consumer Defensive

OMXS.L
2.9%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Energy

OMXS.L
0.1%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Utilities

OMXS.L
0.0%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares OMX Stockholm Capped UCITS ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with OMXS.L:
OMXS.L vs. ^DWCFOMXS.L vs. EWDOMXS.L vs. VGEU.DEOMXS.L vs. BRK-BOMXS.L vs. SPYOMXS.L vs. ^GSPCOMXS.L vs. TMFC
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

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
OMXS.L
OMXS.L Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
OMXS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMXS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMXS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
OMXS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMXS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares OMX Stockholm Capped UCITS ETF (OMXS.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.

OMXS.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.42
2.66

-1.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.10
3.56

-1.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.47

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.82

3.77

-1.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.54

10.74

-4.20

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

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

The current OMXS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is lower than the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OMXS.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

OMXS.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.42

2.66

-1.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

0.94

-0.68

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

1.12

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

1.17

-0.68

Drawdowns

OMXS.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OMXS.L drawdown since its inception was -32.75%, which is greater than CNDX.L's maximum drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMXS.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

OMXS.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.75%

-27.74%

-5.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.98%

-11.11%

-2.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.14%

-24.37%

+7.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.75%

-27.74%

-5.01%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-27.74%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.99%

0.00%

-3.99%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.64%

-4.72%

-3.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.89%

3.93%

-0.04%

Volatility

OMXS.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares OMX Stockholm Capped UCITS ETF (OMXS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.36% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) at 4.87%. This indicates that OMXS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

OMXS.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.36%

4.87%

+1.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.07%

11.61%

+3.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.95%

15.74%

+2.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.80%

20.08%

+0.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.15%

20.20%

-0.05%

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

OMXS.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

OMXS.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither OMXS.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%
OMXS.L
iShares OMX Stockholm Capped 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%

Frequently Asked Questions

OMXS.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, OMXS.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

OMXS.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

OMXS.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. OMXS.L tracks MSCI Sweden NR SEK, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for OMXS.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for OMXS.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