UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ
UIC2.DE (UBS ETF (LU) Solactive China Technology UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UIC2.DE is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Solactive China Technology, while CQQQ is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UIC2.DE returned -8.06%/yr vs -6.44%/yr for CQQQ. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UIC2.DE charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.
Performance
UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
UIC2.DE is traded in EUR, while CQQQ is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CQQQ values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UIC2.DE achieves a -6.51% return, which is significantly lower than CQQQ's 4.70% return.
UIC2.DE
- 1D
- -0.65%
- 1M
- -1.09%
- YTD
- -6.51%
- 6M
- -8.96%
- 1Y
- 0.73%
- 3Y*
- 8.94%
- 5Y*
- -8.06%
- 10Y*
- —
CQQQ
- 1D
- 0.89%
- 1M
- 6.21%
- YTD
- 4.70%
- 6M
- 5.72%
- 1Y
- 29.29%
- 3Y*
- 8.31%
- 5Y*
- -6.44%
- 10Y*
- 5.15%
UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UIC2.DE UBS ETF (LU) Solactive China Technology UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc | -6.51% | 25.73% | 19.00% | -13.83% | -24.39% | -33.70% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 4.70% | 18.95% | 17.09% | -19.21% | -25.76% | -26.13% |
Correlation
The correlation between UIC2.DE and CQQQ is 0.73, 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 | 0.73 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2021 | 0.80 |
The correlation between UIC2.DE and CQQQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
UIC2.DE
CQQQ
UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) Solactive China Technology UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UIC2.DE) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). 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.
| UIC2.DE | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.29 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 1.19 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.02 | 1.28 | -1.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.04 | 2.89 | -2.85 |
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
| UIC2.DE | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.02 | 1.02 | -1.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.21 | -0.18 | -0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.16 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.24 | 0.24 | -0.49 |
Drawdowns
UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UIC2.DE drawdown since its inception was -63.35%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -70.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UIC2.DE and CQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UIC2.DE | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.35% | -70.82% | +7.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.64% | -22.97% | -7.67% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.66% | -34.70% | +4.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -63.26% | -63.57% | +0.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -70.82% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -39.60% | -46.48% | +6.88% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -42.07% | -25.51% | -16.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.47% | 10.15% | +8.32% |
Volatility
UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UBS ETF (LU) Solactive China Technology UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UIC2.DE) is 10.04%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 11.01%. This indicates that UIC2.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UIC2.DE | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.04% | 11.01% | -0.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.36% | 20.99% | -3.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 33.06% | 28.91% | +4.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.72% | 36.55% | +1.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.40% | 32.55% | +4.85% |
UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
UIC2.DE has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
UIC2.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.09%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.09% | 2.17% | 0.28% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.41% | 1.69% | 1.77% |
UIC2.DE UBS ETF (LU) Solactive China Technology UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc | 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
UIC2.DE and CQQQ have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, UIC2.DE is cheaper at 0.47% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
UIC2.DE is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for CQQQ.
UIC2.DE is categorized as Technology Equities, while CQQQ is China Equities. UIC2.DE tracks Solactive China Technology, while CQQQ tracks FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for UIC2.DE and 0.70% for CQQQ.
Find the right allocation for UIC2.DE and CQQQ
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