RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RBTX.L (iShares Automation & Robotics UCITS ETF) and CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - RBTX.L is a Robotics fund tracking the iSTOXX® FactSet Automation & Robotics, while CNX1.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RBTX.L returned 11.91%/yr vs 18.83%/yr for CNX1.L. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RBTX.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for CNX1.L.

Performance

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Automation & Robotics UCITS ETF (RBTX.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RBTX.L achieves a 29.04% return, which is significantly higher than CNX1.L's 19.85% return.

RBTX.L

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 9.00%
• YTD: 29.04%
• 6M: 26.25%
• 1Y: 47.66%
• 3Y*: 18.77%
• 5Y*: 11.91%
• 10Y*: —

CNX1.L

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 9.63%
• YTD: 19.85%
• 6M: 18.42%
• 1Y: 41.69%
• 3Y*: 24.68%
• 5Y*: 18.83%
• 10Y*: 22.43%

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

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RBTX.L iShares Automation & Robotics UCITS ETF	29.04%	9.17%	7.51%	32.05%	-26.55%	22.26%	35.08%	32.52%	-13.97%	34.09%
CNX1.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	19.85%	11.57%	28.51%	47.71%	-25.53%	29.50%	43.24%	33.63%	4.62%	20.13%

Correlation

The correlation between RBTX.L and CNX1.L is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2016	0.83

The correlation between RBTX.L and CNX1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RBTX.L	CNX1.L
Technology	73.2%	57.3%
Industrials	25.1%	2.8%
Healthcare	1.6%	3.8%
Basic Materials	0.1%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	11.6%
Communication Services	-	14.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.9%
Energy	-	0.5%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.3%

Return for Risk

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

RBTX.L

RBTX.L Risk / Return Rank: 69
RBTX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
RBTX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
RBTX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 67
RBTX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
RBTX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 61

CNX1.L

CNX1.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CNX1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CNX1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CNX1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
CNX1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Automation & Robotics UCITS ETF (RBTX.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.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.

	RBTX.L	CNX1.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.27	2.82	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.18	3.72	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.50	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.62	3.76	-0.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.72	11.10	-0.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RBTX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is comparable to the CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RBTX.L and CNX1.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RBTX.L	CNX1.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.27	2.82	-0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.56	0.98	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.16	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	1.14	-0.37

Drawdowns

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RBTX.L drawdown since its inception was -33.46%, which is greater than CNX1.L's maximum drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RBTX.L and CNX1.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	RBTX.L	CNX1.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.46%	-27.56%	-5.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.10%	-11.03%	-2.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.28%	-24.56%	-2.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.46%	-27.56%	-5.90%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-27.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	-0.63%	+0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.25%	-4.57%	-3.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.43%	3.75%	+0.68%

Volatility

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Automation & Robotics UCITS ETF (RBTX.L) has a higher volatility of 7.01% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) at 4.13%. This indicates that RBTX.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNX1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RBTX.L	CNX1.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.01%	4.13%	+2.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.35%	10.38%	+5.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.86%	14.70%	+6.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.16%	19.16%	+2.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.70%	19.44%	+1.26%

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RBTX.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CNX1.L's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

RBTX.L vs. CNX1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither RBTX.L nor CNX1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RBTX.L and CNX1.L in my portfolio?

RBTX.L and CNX1.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RBTX.L or CNX1.L?

On fees, CNX1.L is cheaper at 0.36% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RBTX.L or CNX1.L?

CNX1.L is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RBTX.L.

What is the main difference between RBTX.L and CNX1.L?

RBTX.L is categorized as Robotics, while CNX1.L is Nasdaq-100. RBTX.L tracks iSTOXX® FactSet Automation & Robotics, while CNX1.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RBTX.L and 0.36% for CNX1.L.