PGJ vs. CNXT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and CNXT (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF) are both China Equities funds - PGJ tracks the Halter USX China Index while CNXT tracks the SME-ChiNext 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PGJ returned 0.21%/yr vs 6.57%/yr for CNXT. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CNXT.

Performance

PGJ vs. CNXT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -11.48% return, which is significantly lower than CNXT's 32.68% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has underperformed CNXT with an annualized return of 0.21%, while CNXT has yielded a comparatively higher 6.57% annualized return.

PGJ

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: -4.23%
• YTD: -11.48%
• 6M: -13.73%
• 1Y: -7.05%
• 3Y*: 2.92%
• 5Y*: -13.73%
• 10Y*: 0.21%

CNXT

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 9.11%
• YTD: 32.68%
• 6M: 39.36%
• 1Y: 114.61%
• 3Y*: 26.75%
• 5Y*: 3.96%
• 10Y*: 6.57%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PGJ vs. CNXT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	-11.48%	13.66%	5.91%	-2.38%	-24.50%	-42.87%	54.24%	32.18%	-29.51%	60.27%
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	32.68%	59.31%	12.42%	-21.47%	-35.58%	8.78%	63.30%	42.66%	-39.48%	20.19%

Correlation

The correlation between PGJ and CNXT is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2014	0.51

The correlation between PGJ and CNXT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

PGJ vs. CNXT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PGJ	CNXT
Consumer Cyclical	44.8%	1.2%
Technology	16.2%	43.8%
Communication Services	14.5%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	2.6%
Industrials	6.5%	33.2%
Financial Services	3.6%	5.6%
Real Estate	3.1%	-
Energy	2.3%	-
Healthcare	0.8%	7.0%
Basic Materials	-	4.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

PGJ vs. CNXT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

PGJ

PGJ Risk / Return Rank: 6
PGJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Omega Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Martin Ratio Rank: 7

CNXT

CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 93
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 89
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

PGJ vs. CNXT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT). 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.

	PGJ	CNXT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.29	3.75	-4.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.26	4.40	-4.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.55	-0.58
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.28	9.44	-9.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.52	28.91	-29.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PGJ vs. CNXT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PGJ Sharpe Ratio is -0.29, which is lower than the CNXT Sharpe Ratio of 3.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PGJ and CNXT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PGJ	CNXT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.29	3.75	-4.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.32	0.11	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.01	0.21	-0.20
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.12	0.22	-0.11

Drawdowns

PGJ vs. CNXT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than CNXT's maximum drawdown of -68.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and CNXT.

Drawdown Indicators

	PGJ	CNXT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.37%	-68.98%	-9.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.69%	-12.21%	-13.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.82%	-48.60%	+17.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-70.00%	-61.21%	-8.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-78.37%	-63.30%	-15.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-66.25%	-2.76%	-63.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.74%	-42.93%	+11.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.49%	3.98%	+9.51%

Volatility

PGJ vs. CNXT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) is 8.54%, while VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) has a volatility of 10.30%. This indicates that PGJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNXT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PGJ	CNXT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.54%	10.30%	-1.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.28%	19.99%	-2.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.46%	30.73%	-6.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.73%	35.26%	+8.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.69%	31.64%	+5.05%

PGJ vs. CNXT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than CNXT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

PGJ vs. CNXT - Dividend Comparison

PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.58%, more than CNXT's 0.14% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	0.14%	0.18%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	9.22%	0.01%	0.45%	0.00%	0.19%	0.00%	0.00%
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	3.58%	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

Can I hold both PGJ and CNXT in my portfolio?

PGJ and CNXT have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PGJ or CNXT?

CNXT has higher volatility (10.30%) compared to PGJ (8.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs CNXT's -68.98%.

Which ETF is better, PGJ or CNXT?

On 10-year performance, CNXT leads with 6.57% vs 0.21% for PGJ. On fees, CNXT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, PGJ has been the lower-risk option at 8.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PGJ or CNXT?

Over the 10-year period, CNXT has performed better with a 6.57% return vs 0.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PGJ or CNXT?

CNXT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for PGJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PGJ or CNXT?

PGJ has the higher dividend yield at 3.58%, compared with 0.14% for CNXT.

What is the main difference between PGJ and CNXT?

PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index, while CNXT tracks SME-ChiNext 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.65% for CNXT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNXT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.75 vs -0.29), 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.