PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QNTG.L vs. ASMH
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

QNTG.L vs. ASMH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc (QNTG.L) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

QNTG.L vs. ASMH - Yearly Performance Comparison


Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QNTG.L achieves a -6.88% return, which is significantly lower than ASMH's 31.28% return.


QNTG.L

1D
4.04%
1M
-6.13%
YTD
-6.88%
6M
-7.90%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

ASMH

1D
2.45%
1M
-2.24%
YTD
31.28%
6M
40.38%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


QNTG.L vs. ASMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

QNTG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than ASMH's 0.19% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

QNTG.L vs. ASMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc (QNTG.L) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

QNTG.L vs. ASMH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QNTG.LASMHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

3.11

-2.66

Correlation

The correlation between QNTG.L and ASMH is 0.36, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

QNTG.L vs. ASMH - Dividend Comparison

QNTG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ASMH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.26%.


Drawdowns

QNTG.L vs. ASMH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QNTG.L drawdown since its inception was -23.25%, which is greater than ASMH's maximum drawdown of -15.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QNTG.L and ASMH.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


QNTG.LASMHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.25%

-15.89%

-7.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.84%

-8.83%

-11.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.95%

-4.45%

-3.50%

Volatility

QNTG.L vs. ASMH - Volatility Comparison


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


QNTG.LASMHDifference

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.42%

37.19%

-9.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.42%

37.19%

-9.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.42%

37.19%

-9.77%