PortfoliosLab logo
PortfoliosLab logo
Tools
Performance Analysis
Portfolio Analysis
Factor Model
Portfolios
Lazy PortfoliosUser Portfolios
Discussions
PGJ vs. CQQQ
Performance
Risk-Adjusted Performance
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Key characteristics


PGJCQQQ
YTD Return2.62%16.69%
1Y Return3.16%12.00%
3Y Return (Ann)-16.41%-16.68%
5Y Return (Ann)-6.76%-2.75%
10Y Return (Ann)-0.81%1.62%
Sharpe Ratio0.170.38
Sortino Ratio0.520.86
Omega Ratio1.061.10
Calmar Ratio0.080.20
Martin Ratio0.471.07
Ulcer Index12.26%13.68%
Daily Std Dev34.50%38.53%
Max Drawdown-78.37%-73.99%
Current Drawdown-67.50%-60.96%

Correlation

-0.50.00.51.00.9

The correlation between PGJ and CQQQ is 0.86, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Performance

PGJ vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison

In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a 2.62% return, which is significantly lower than CQQQ's 16.69% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has underperformed CQQQ with an annualized return of -0.81%, while CQQQ has yielded a comparatively higher 1.62% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.


-20.00%-10.00%0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%JuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovember
-5.08%
13.65%
PGJ
CQQQ

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


PGJ vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both PGJ and CQQQ have an expense ratio of 0.70%.


PGJ
Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF
Expense ratio chart for PGJ: current value at 0.70% compared with the broader market ranging from 0.00% to 2.12%.0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%0.70%
Expense ratio chart for CQQQ: current value at 0.70% compared with the broader market ranging from 0.00% to 2.12%.0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%0.70%

Risk-Adjusted Performance

PGJ vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). 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
Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for PGJ, currently valued at 0.17, compared to the broader market-2.000.002.004.006.000.17
Sortino ratio
The chart of Sortino ratio for PGJ, currently valued at 0.52, compared to the broader market0.005.0010.000.52
Omega ratio
The chart of Omega ratio for PGJ, currently valued at 1.06, compared to the broader market1.001.502.002.503.001.06
Calmar ratio
The chart of Calmar ratio for PGJ, currently valued at 0.08, compared to the broader market0.005.0010.0015.000.08
Martin ratio
The chart of Martin ratio for PGJ, currently valued at 0.47, compared to the broader market0.0020.0040.0060.0080.00100.00120.000.47
CQQQ
Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for CQQQ, currently valued at 0.38, compared to the broader market-2.000.002.004.006.000.38
Sortino ratio
The chart of Sortino ratio for CQQQ, currently valued at 0.86, compared to the broader market0.005.0010.000.86
Omega ratio
The chart of Omega ratio for CQQQ, currently valued at 1.10, compared to the broader market1.001.502.002.503.001.10
Calmar ratio
The chart of Calmar ratio for CQQQ, currently valued at 0.20, compared to the broader market0.005.0010.0015.000.20
Martin ratio
The chart of Martin ratio for CQQQ, currently valued at 1.07, compared to the broader market0.0020.0040.0060.0080.00100.00120.001.07

PGJ vs. CQQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PGJ Sharpe Ratio is 0.17, which is lower than the CQQQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PGJ and CQQQ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Rolling 12-month Sharpe Ratio-1.00-0.500.000.501.00JuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovember
0.17
0.38
PGJ
CQQQ

Dividends

PGJ vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison

PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.14%, more than CQQQ's 0.47% yield.


TTM20232022202120202019201820172016201520142013
PGJ
Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF
6.14%2.50%0.84%0.00%0.31%0.17%0.31%2.05%1.94%0.37%0.89%0.96%
CQQQ
Invesco China Technology ETF
0.47%0.55%0.08%0.00%0.47%0.01%0.43%1.42%1.69%1.77%1.00%0.79%

Drawdowns

PGJ vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than CQQQ's maximum drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and CQQQ. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.


-70.00%-65.00%-60.00%-55.00%JuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovember
-67.50%
-60.96%
PGJ
CQQQ

Volatility

PGJ vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) is 10.99%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 13.68%. This indicates that PGJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%JuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovember
10.99%
13.68%
PGJ
CQQQ