PGJ vs. CHIQ
PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and CHIQ (Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF) are both China Equities funds - PGJ tracks the Halter USX China Index while CHIQ tracks the MSCI China Consumer Discretionary 10/50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PGJ returned -0.29%/yr vs 5.79%/yr for CHIQ. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CHIQ.
Performance
PGJ vs. CHIQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -23.70% return, which is significantly higher than CHIQ's -26.08% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has underperformed CHIQ with an annualized return of -0.29%, while CHIQ has yielded a comparatively higher 5.79% annualized return.
PGJ
- 1D
- -2.80%
- 1M
- -12.94%
- YTD
- -23.70%
- 6M
- -24.84%
- 1Y
- -21.34%
- 3Y*
- -2.41%
- 5Y*
- -16.10%
- 10Y*
- -0.29%
CHIQ
- 1D
- -2.06%
- 1M
- -15.21%
- YTD
- -26.08%
- 6M
- -26.95%
- 1Y
- -25.74%
- 3Y*
- -2.12%
- 5Y*
- -13.51%
- 10Y*
- 5.79%
PGJ vs. CHIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | -23.70% | 13.66% | 5.91% | -2.38% | -24.50% | -42.87% | 54.24% | 32.18% | -29.51% | 60.27% |
CHIQ Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF | -26.08% | 13.69% | 10.74% | -10.70% | -22.01% | -27.07% | 92.61% | 44.19% | -28.65% | 67.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between PGJ and CHIQ is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2009 | 0.84 |
The correlation between PGJ and CHIQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
PGJ vs. CHIQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PGJ
CHIQ
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
-
Technology
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
Industrials
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
PGJ
CHIQ
Communication Services
PGJ
CHIQ
-
Technology
PGJ
CHIQ
Consumer Defensive
PGJ
CHIQ
Financial Services
PGJ
CHIQ
-
Real Estate
PGJ
CHIQ
Industrials
PGJ
CHIQ
Energy
PGJ
CHIQ
-
Healthcare
PGJ
CHIQ
-
Basic Materials
PGJ
-
CHIQ
-
Utilities
PGJ
-
CHIQ
-
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
PGJ vs. CHIQ — Risk / Return Rank
PGJ
CHIQ
PGJ vs. CHIQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF (CHIQ). 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.
| PGJ | CHIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.87 | 0.82 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.61 | -0.73 | +0.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.41 | -1.84 | +0.43 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PGJ vs. CHIQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than CHIQ's maximum drawdown of -67.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and CHIQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PGJ | CHIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.37% | -67.04% | -11.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.08% | -35.53% | +0.45% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.08% | -35.53% | +0.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -70.00% | -59.95% | -10.05% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.37% | -67.04% | -11.33% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -70.91% | -61.22% | -9.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.83% | -30.70% | -1.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.21% | 14.03% | +1.18% |
Volatility
PGJ vs. CHIQ - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF (CHIQ) have volatilities of 6.66% and 6.76%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PGJ | CHIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.66% | 6.76% | -0.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.82% | 16.27% | +1.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.38% | 22.30% | +2.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.77% | 37.76% | +6.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.71% | 32.43% | +4.28% |
PGJ vs. CHIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than CHIQ's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
PGJ vs. CHIQ - Dividend Comparison
PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.50%, more than CHIQ's 2.00% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CHIQ Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF | 2.00% | 1.48% | 2.65% | 2.26% | 0.38% | 0.00% | 0.11% | 1.05% | 2.71% | 0.62% | 1.51% | 4.86% |
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 3.50% | 3.38% | 4.70% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PGJ and CHIQ have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CHIQ has higher volatility (6.76%) compared to PGJ (6.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs CHIQ's -67.04%.
On 10-year performance, CHIQ leads with 5.79% vs -0.29% for PGJ. On fees, CHIQ is cheaper at 0.65% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CHIQ has performed better with a 5.79% return vs -0.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CHIQ is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for PGJ.
PGJ has the higher dividend yield at 3.50%, compared with 2.00% for CHIQ.
PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index, while CHIQ tracks MSCI China Consumer Discretionary 10/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.65% for CHIQ.
PGJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.88 vs -1.16), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for PGJ and CHIQ
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