PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

XLKQ.L (Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc) and CNX1.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - XLKQ.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index, while CNX1.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLKQ.L returned 26.77%/yr vs 22.21%/yr for CNX1.L. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XLKQ.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for CNX1.L.

Performance

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLKQ.L achieves a 20.44% return, which is significantly higher than CNX1.L's 17.33% return. Over the past 10 years, XLKQ.L has outperformed CNX1.L with an annualized return of 26.77%, while CNX1.L has yielded a comparatively lower 22.21% annualized return.

XLKQ.L

1D
-0.03%
1M
6.65%
YTD
20.44%
6M
17.20%
1Y
49.26%
3Y*
32.80%
5Y*
25.71%
10Y*
26.77%

CNX1.L

1D
-0.16%
1M
3.85%
YTD
17.33%
6M
15.28%
1Y
38.06%
3Y*
24.63%
5Y*
18.10%
10Y*
22.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XLKQ.L
Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc		20.44%15.76%44.03%51.84%-20.58%36.28%37.93%44.38%2.54%21.82%
CNX1.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		17.33%11.57%28.51%47.71%-25.53%29.50%43.24%33.63%4.62%20.13%

Correlation

The correlation between XLKQ.L and CNX1.L is 0.93, 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

0.93

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

0.94

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

0.94

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2010

0.88

The correlation between XLKQ.L and CNX1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XLKQ.L
CNX1.L

Technology

91.2%
57.9%

Financial Services

7.3%
0.2%

Industrials

1.5%
2.8%

Basic Materials

-

1.0%

Communication Services

-

14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

-

11.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.6%

Energy

-

0.5%

Healthcare

-

3.7%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Utilities

-

1.2%

Technology

XLKQ.L
91.2%
CNX1.L
57.9%

Financial Services

XLKQ.L
7.3%
CNX1.L
0.2%

Industrials

XLKQ.L
1.5%
CNX1.L
2.8%

Basic Materials

XLKQ.L

-

CNX1.L
1.0%

Communication Services

XLKQ.L

-

CNX1.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

XLKQ.L

-

CNX1.L
11.6%

Consumer Defensive

XLKQ.L

-

CNX1.L
6.6%

Energy

XLKQ.L

-

CNX1.L
0.5%

Healthcare

XLKQ.L

-

CNX1.L
3.7%

Real Estate

XLKQ.L

-

CNX1.L
0.1%

Utilities

XLKQ.L

-

CNX1.L
1.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

Often compared with XLKQ.L:
XLKQ.L vs. XLKXLKQ.L vs. IITU.LXLKQ.L vs. XLKS.LXLKQ.L vs. IUIT.LXLKQ.L vs. SMGB.LXLKQ.L vs. XNAQ.LXLKQ.L vs. VUAG.L
Often compared with CNX1.L:
CNX1.L vs. CNDX.LCNX1.L vs. EQQQ.LCNX1.L vs. IITU.LCNX1.L vs. EQGB.LCNX1.L vs. QQQCNX1.L vs. XNAQ.LCNX1.L vs. SXRV.DE

Return for Risk

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XLKQ.L
XLKQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
XLKQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLKQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLKQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
XLKQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLKQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank
CNX1.L
CNX1.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
CNX1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNX1.L 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.

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.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.

XLKQ.LCNX1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.53
2.55

-0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.25
3.39

-0.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.45

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.93

3.44

-0.51

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.59

10.12

-2.52

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLKQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the CNX1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLKQ.L and CNX1.L, 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

XLKQ.LCNX1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.53

2.55

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.98

0.60

+0.39

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.14

0.87

+0.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.80

0.04

+0.77

Drawdowns

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLKQ.L drawdown since its inception was -38.43%, 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 XLKQ.L and CNX1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XLKQ.LCNX1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.43%

-27.56%

-10.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.76%

-11.03%

-5.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.74%

-24.56%

-4.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.74%

-27.56%

-1.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.74%

-27.56%

-1.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.48%

-2.72%

-2.76%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.08%

-4.91%

-3.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.47%

3.75%

+2.72%

Volatility

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.L) has a higher volatility of 7.40% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CNX1.L) at 4.62%. This indicates that XLKQ.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

XLKQ.LCNX1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.40%

4.62%

+2.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.52%

10.57%

+3.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.43%

14.87%

+4.56%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.15%

30.27%

-4.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.38%

25.50%

-2.12%

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLKQ.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than CNX1.L's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

XLKQ.L vs. CNX1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XLKQ.L nor CNX1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.93, XLKQ.L and CNX1.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, XLKQ.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XLKQ.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for CNX1.L.

XLKQ.L is categorized as Technology Equities, while CNX1.L is Nasdaq-100. XLKQ.L tracks S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index, while CNX1.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLKQ.L and 0.36% for CNX1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XLKQ.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