UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about UBS ETF (LU) Solactive China Technology UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UIC2.DE) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ).

UIC2.DE and CQQQ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. UIC2.DE is a passively managed fund by UBS that tracks the performance of the Solactive China Technology. It was launched on Mar 5, 2021. CQQQ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the AlphaShares China Technology Index. It was launched on Dec 8, 2009. Both UIC2.DE and CQQQ are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) Solactive China Technology UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UIC2.DE) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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	-7.77%	25.73%	19.00%	-13.83%	-24.39%	-33.70%
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF	-10.41%	18.95%	17.09%	-19.21%	-25.76%	-26.13%

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 -7.77% return, which is significantly higher than CQQQ's -10.10% return.

UIC2.DE

• 1D: 1.53%
• 1M: -0.33%
• YTD: -7.77%
• 6M: -22.08%
• 1Y: -2.65%
• 3Y*: 4.57%
• 5Y*: -9.43%
• 10Y*: —

CQQQ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -8.90%
• YTD: -10.10%
• 6M: -20.07%
• 1Y: -1.13%
• 3Y*: -1.54%
• 5Y*: -10.40%
• 10Y*: 3.61%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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.

CQQQ

Invesco China Technology ETF

UIC2.DE

UBS ETF (LU) Solactive China Technology UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc

Return for Risk

UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

UIC2.DE

UIC2.DE Risk / Return Rank: 11
UIC2.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
UIC2.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
UIC2.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 11
UIC2.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
UIC2.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 11

CQQQ

CQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 17
CQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
CQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
CQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 17
CQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
CQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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.

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 ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.08	-0.04	-0.04
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.14	0.18	-0.04
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.02	0.00
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	-0.03	-0.01
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.08	-0.07	-0.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UIC2.DE vs. CQQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UIC2.DE Sharpe Ratio is -0.08, which is lower than the CQQQ Sharpe Ratio of -0.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UIC2.DE and CQQQ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UIC2.DE	CQQQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.08	-0.04	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.25	-0.29	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.26	0.21	-0.47

Correlation

The correlation between UIC2.DE and CQQQ is 0.80, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

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 2.45%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF	2.45%	2.17%	0.28%	0.55%	0.08%	0.00%	0.47%	0.01%	0.43%	1.41%	1.69%	1.77%

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	UIC2.DE	CQQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.35%	-73.99%	+10.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.64%	-24.41%	-6.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-63.26%	-67.04%	+3.78%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.42%	-56.24%	+15.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.17%	-28.05%	-14.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.06%	9.10%	+5.96%

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 6.81%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 9.08%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	UIC2.DE	CQQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.81%	9.08%	-2.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.93%	20.63%	+6.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.21%	31.91%	+3.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	37.67%	36.25%	+1.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.66%	32.37%	+5.29%