PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Vanguard FTSE Developed World UCITS ETF Acc (VHVG.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.AS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

VHVG.L is traded in GBP, while CNDX.AS is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the CNDX.AS values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VHVG.L achieves a 10.71% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.AS's 20.01% return.


VHVG.L

1D
-0.98%
1M
2.91%
YTD
10.71%
6M
10.78%
1Y
27.85%
3Y*
17.95%
5Y*
13.07%
10Y*

CNDX.AS

1D
-0.69%
1M
6.94%
YTD
20.01%
6M
17.58%
1Y
40.93%
3Y*
24.70%
5Y*
18.83%
10Y*
22.42%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
VHVG.L
Vanguard FTSE Developed World UCITS ETF Acc
10.71%13.84%20.00%17.53%-8.16%22.64%12.56%-17.91%
CNDX.AS
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF
20.01%11.84%29.14%47.41%-26.28%30.57%43.51%4.99%

Correlation

The correlation between VHVG.L and CNDX.AS is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2019

0.83

The correlation between VHVG.L and CNDX.AS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.84 - 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

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS — Risk / Return Rank

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

VHVG.L
VHVG.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
VHVG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VHVG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
VHVG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
VHVG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
VHVG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

CNDX.AS
CNDX.AS Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
CNDX.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNDX.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNDX.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
CNDX.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNDX.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard FTSE Developed World UCITS ETF Acc (VHVG.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.AS). 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.


VHVG.LCNDX.ASDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.48

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.09

3.71

+0.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.81

10.83

+5.98

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VHVG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.75, which is comparable to the CNDX.AS Sharpe Ratio of 2.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VHVG.L and CNDX.AS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


VHVG.LCNDX.ASDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.75

2.74

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

0.96

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.47

1.06

-0.59

Drawdowns

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VHVG.L drawdown since its inception was -35.32%, which is greater than CNDX.AS's maximum drawdown of -27.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VHVG.L and CNDX.AS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VHVG.LCNDX.ASDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.32%

-27.59%

-7.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.94%

-11.00%

+4.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.95%

-24.96%

+5.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.95%

-27.59%

+7.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.33%

-0.69%

-0.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.18%

-4.64%

-2.54%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.69%

3.80%

-2.11%

Volatility

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Vanguard FTSE Developed World UCITS ETF Acc (VHVG.L) is 2.71%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.AS) has a volatility of 4.62%. This indicates that VHVG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNDX.AS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VHVG.LCNDX.ASDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.71%

4.62%

-1.91%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.60%

10.47%

-2.87%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.32%

14.94%

-4.62%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.93%

19.29%

-0.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.58%

19.58%

+1.00%

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS - Expense Ratio Comparison

VHVG.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than CNDX.AS's 0.36% expense ratio.


Dividends

VHVG.L vs. CNDX.AS - Dividend Comparison

Neither VHVG.L nor CNDX.AS has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


VHVG.L and CNDX.AS have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, VHVG.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

VHVG.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for CNDX.AS.

VHVG.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CNDX.AS is Nasdaq-100. VHVG.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CNDX.AS tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for VHVG.L and 0.36% for CNDX.AS.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for VHVG.L and CNDX.AS

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