UC04.L vs. QQQ
Compare and contrast key facts about UBS ETF (IE) MSCI USA UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC04.L) and Invesco QQQ (QQQ).
UC04.L and QQQ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. UC04.L is a passively managed fund by UBS that tracks the performance of the Russell 1000 TR USD. It was launched on Apr 11, 2012. QQQ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ-100 Index. It was launched on Mar 10, 1999. Both UC04.L and QQQ are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: UC04.L or QQQ.
Key characteristics
| UC04.L | QQQ | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 20.35% | 21.49% |
| 1Y Return | 32.71% | 44.45% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 10.84% | 9.43% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 15.35% | 21.11% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 15.23% | 18.20% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.99 | 2.63 |
| Sortino Ratio | 4.05 | 3.38 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.57 | 1.47 |
| Calmar Ratio | 5.13 | 3.33 |
| Martin Ratio | 20.25 | 12.21 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.65% | 3.70% |
| Daily Std Dev | 11.18% | 17.18% |
| Max Drawdown | -25.93% | -82.98% |
| Current Drawdown | -0.28% | -1.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between UC04.L and QQQ is 0.53, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
UC04.L vs. QQQ - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, UC04.L achieves a 20.35% return, which is significantly lower than QQQ's 21.49% return. Over the past 10 years, UC04.L has underperformed QQQ with an annualized return of 15.23%, while QQQ has yielded a comparatively higher 18.20% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
UC04.L vs. QQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
UC04.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQ's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
UC04.L vs. QQQ - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (IE) MSCI USA UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC04.L) and Invesco QQQ (QQQ). 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.
Dividends
UC04.L vs. QQQ - Dividend Comparison
UC04.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, more than QQQ's 0.61% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UC04.L UBS ETF (IE) MSCI USA UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis | 1.01% | 1.12% | 1.19% | 0.89% | 1.28% | 1.40% | 1.50% | 1.32% | 1.52% | 1.44% | 1.25% | 1.41% |
QQQ Invesco QQQ | 0.61% | 0.62% | 0.80% | 0.43% | 0.55% | 0.74% | 0.91% | 0.84% | 1.06% | 0.99% | 1.41% | 1.01% |
Drawdowns
UC04.L vs. QQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UC04.L drawdown since its inception was -25.93%, smaller than the maximum QQQ drawdown of -82.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UC04.L and QQQ. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
UC04.L vs. QQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UBS ETF (IE) MSCI USA UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC04.L) is 1.92%, while Invesco QQQ (QQQ) has a volatility of 3.80%. This indicates that UC04.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.