PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
SCHG vs. CNDX.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

SCHG vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SCHG returned 18.53%/yr vs 21.32%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SCHG charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCHG achieves a 3.75% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 16.32% return. Over the past 10 years, SCHG has underperformed CNDX.L with an annualized return of 18.53%, while CNDX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 21.32% annualized return.

SCHG

1D
0.15%
1M
-0.94%
YTD
3.75%
6M
2.93%
1Y
20.82%
3Y*
24.03%
5Y*
14.90%
10Y*
18.53%

CNDX.L

1D
-0.36%
1M
1.61%
YTD
16.32%
6M
15.48%
1Y
36.18%
3Y*
27.08%
5Y*
16.76%
10Y*
21.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF		3.75%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%39.14%36.02%-1.36%28.05%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		16.32%19.75%26.42%56.22%-33.49%27.92%48.25%37.96%-1.08%31.91%

Correlation

The correlation between SCHG and CNDX.L is 0.70, 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

0.70

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.62

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.61

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2010

0.57

The correlation between SCHG and CNDX.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (all time) to 0.70 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
SCHG
CNDX.L

Technology

46.3%
57.9%

Communication Services

16.0%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

12.7%
11.6%

Healthcare

7.7%
3.7%

Financial Services

6.7%
0.2%

Industrials

5.8%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

1.7%
6.6%

Basic Materials

1.4%
1.0%

Energy

0.8%
0.5%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.1%

Utilities

0.4%
1.2%

Technology

SCHG
46.3%
CNDX.L
57.9%

Communication Services

SCHG
16.0%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

SCHG
12.7%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Healthcare

SCHG
7.7%
CNDX.L
3.7%

Financial Services

SCHG
6.7%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Industrials

SCHG
5.8%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

SCHG
1.7%
CNDX.L
6.6%

Basic Materials

SCHG
1.4%
CNDX.L
1.0%

Energy

SCHG
0.8%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Real Estate

SCHG
0.5%
CNDX.L
0.1%

Utilities

SCHG
0.4%
CNDX.L
1.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with SCHG:
SCHG vs. SCHDSCHG vs. QQQMSCHG vs. VOOSCHG vs. VUGSCHG vs. QQQSCHG vs. SPMOSCHG vs. SPYG
Often compared with CNDX.L:
CNDX.L vs. QQQCNDX.L vs. EQQQ.DECNDX.L vs. SXRV.DECNDX.L vs. CNX1.LCNDX.L vs. CSPX.LCNDX.L vs. EQQU.LCNDX.L vs. VWRA.L

Return for Risk

SCHG vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
CNDX.L
CNDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.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.

SCHGCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.33
2.25

-0.92

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.82
3.13

-1.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.39

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.27

3.27

-2.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.25

11.72

-7.47

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCHG Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is lower than the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCHG and CNDX.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

SCHGCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.33

2.25

-0.92

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.67

0.80

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

1.06

-0.20

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.83

1.03

-0.20

Drawdowns

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCHG drawdown since its inception was -34.59%, roughly equal to the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCHG and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

SCHGCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.59%

-35.21%

+0.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.41%

-11.00%

-5.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.39%

-22.44%

-0.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.59%

-35.21%

+0.62%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.59%

-35.21%

+0.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.25%

-3.53%

-0.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.20%

-5.13%

-0.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.91%

3.08%

+1.83%

Volatility

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) is 4.52%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 5.44%. This indicates that SCHG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

SCHGCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.52%

5.44%

-0.92%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.02%

12.12%

-0.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.77%

16.04%

-0.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.31%

20.93%

+1.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.58%

20.09%

+1.49%

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCHG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCHG vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

SCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, while CNDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF		0.37%0.36%0.39%0.46%0.55%0.42%0.52%0.82%1.27%1.01%1.04%1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

SCHG and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.

SCHG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for SCHG and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SCHG and CNDX.L

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