SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L
SPDM.L (iShares Physical Palladium ETC) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SPDM.L is a Commodities fund tracking the London Palladium PM Fix, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SPDM.L returned 10.16%/yr vs 22.74%/yr for CNDX.L. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SPDM.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.
Performance
SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
SPDM.L is traded in GBp, while CNDX.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CNDX.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SPDM.L achieves a -13.23% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.90% return. Over the past 10 years, SPDM.L has underperformed CNDX.L with an annualized return of 10.16%, while CNDX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 22.74% annualized return.
SPDM.L
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- -9.27%
- YTD
- -13.23%
- 6M
- -7.76%
- 1Y
- 36.78%
- 3Y*
- -3.85%
- 5Y*
- -12.62%
- 10Y*
- 10.16%
CNDX.L
- 1D
- 0.16%
- 1M
- 11.63%
- YTD
- 20.90%
- 6M
- 19.16%
- 1Y
- 42.84%
- 3Y*
- 25.37%
- 5Y*
- 19.03%
- 10Y*
- 22.74%
SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SPDM.L iShares Physical Palladium ETC | -13.23% | 62.20% | -17.63% | -41.15% | 5.58% | -19.60% | 19.23% | 47.36% | 25.02% | 42.70% |
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 20.90% | 11.22% | 28.66% | 48.50% | -25.54% | 29.17% | 43.97% | 32.82% | 4.84% | 20.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between SPDM.L and CNDX.L is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2011 | 0.20 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank
SPDM.L
CNDX.L
SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Palladium ETC (SPDM.L) 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.
| SPDM.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.48 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.10 | 3.80 | -2.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.37 | 10.82 | -8.44 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SPDM.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.88 | 2.68 | -1.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.30 | 0.95 | -1.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 | 1.12 | -0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.14 | 1.18 | -1.03 |
Drawdowns
SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SPDM.L drawdown since its inception was -70.87%, which is greater than CNDX.L's maximum drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPDM.L and CNDX.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SPDM.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.87% | -27.74% | -43.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.67% | -11.11% | -24.56% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -40.59% | -24.37% | -16.22% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -70.87% | -27.74% | -43.13% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -70.87% | -27.74% | -43.13% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -56.18% | 0.00% | -56.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.10% | -4.72% | -20.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.54% | 3.93% | +12.61% |
Volatility
SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Physical Palladium ETC (SPDM.L) has a higher volatility of 10.84% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) at 4.91%. This indicates that SPDM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SPDM.L | CNDX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.84% | 4.91% | +5.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 37.16% | 11.61% | +25.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 44.70% | 15.81% | +28.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 41.85% | 20.08% | +21.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.57% | 20.20% | +17.37% |
SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SPDM.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.
Dividends
SPDM.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither SPDM.L nor CNDX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNDX.L iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.02% | 0.05% | 0.06% | 0.03% | 0.04% | 0.07% | 0.06% | 0.30% | 0.16% | 0.16% |
SPDM.L iShares Physical Palladium ETC | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SPDM.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SPDM.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SPDM.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CNDX.L.
SPDM.L is categorized as Commodities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. SPDM.L tracks London Palladium PM Fix, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for SPDM.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.
Find the right allocation for SPDM.L 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