SPDM.L vs. CNX1.L
SPDM.L (iShares Physical Palladium ETC) and CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - SPDM.L is a Commodities fund tracking the London Palladium PM Fix, while CNX1.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SPDM.L returned 9.87%/yr vs 22.43%/yr for CNX1.L. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SPDM.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for CNX1.L.
Performance
SPDM.L vs. CNX1.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SPDM.L achieves a -15.50% return, which is significantly lower than CNX1.L's 19.85% return. Over the past 10 years, SPDM.L has underperformed CNX1.L with an annualized return of 9.87%, while CNX1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 22.43% annualized return.
SPDM.L
- 1D
- -2.62%
- 1M
- -9.97%
- YTD
- -15.50%
- 6M
- -8.50%
- 1Y
- 35.48%
- 3Y*
- -4.70%
- 5Y*
- -13.18%
- 10Y*
- 9.87%
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%
SPDM.L vs. CNX1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SPDM.L iShares Physical Palladium ETC | -15.50% | 62.20% | -17.63% | -41.15% | 5.58% | -19.60% | 19.23% | 47.36% | 25.02% | 42.70% |
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 SPDM.L and CNX1.L is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.17 |
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 | 0.21 |
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. CNX1.L — Risk / Return Rank
SPDM.L
CNX1.L
SPDM.L vs. CNX1.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 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.
| SPDM.L | CNX1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.50 | -0.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.91 | 3.76 | -2.85 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.98 | 11.10 | -9.12 |
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 | CNX1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.74 | 2.82 | -2.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.31 | 0.98 | -1.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.26 | 1.16 | -0.90 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.14 | 1.14 | -1.01 |
Drawdowns
SPDM.L vs. CNX1.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SPDM.L drawdown since its inception was -70.87%, 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 SPDM.L and CNX1.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SPDM.L | CNX1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.87% | -27.56% | -43.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.26% | -11.03% | -25.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -40.59% | -24.56% | -16.03% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -70.87% | -27.56% | -43.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -70.87% | -27.56% | -43.31% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -57.32% | -0.63% | -56.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.10% | -4.57% | -20.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.70% | 3.75% | +12.95% |
Volatility
SPDM.L vs. CNX1.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Physical Palladium ETC (SPDM.L) has a higher volatility of 10.52% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) at 4.13%. This indicates that SPDM.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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SPDM.L | CNX1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.52% | 4.13% | +6.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 37.20% | 10.38% | +26.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 44.75% | 14.70% | +30.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 41.86% | 19.16% | +22.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.58% | 19.44% | +18.14% |
SPDM.L vs. CNX1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SPDM.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CNX1.L's 0.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
SPDM.L vs. CNX1.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither SPDM.L nor CNX1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SPDM.L and CNX1.L have a correlation of 0.17, 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 0.36% for CNX1.L.
SPDM.L is categorized as Commodities, while CNX1.L is Nasdaq-100. SPDM.L tracks London Palladium PM Fix, while CNX1.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for SPDM.L and 0.36% for CNX1.L.
Find the right allocation for SPDM.L and CNX1.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