XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO
XQQ.TO (iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and XCH.TO (iShares China Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XQQ.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Morningstar US Market TR CAD, while XCH.TO is a China Equities fund tracking the Morningstar China GR CAD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XQQ.TO returned 20.19%/yr vs 3.68%/yr for XCH.TO. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XQQ.TO charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for XCH.TO.
Performance
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XQQ.TO achieves a 19.59% return, which is significantly higher than XCH.TO's -5.97% return. Over the past 10 years, XQQ.TO has outperformed XCH.TO with an annualized return of 20.19%, while XCH.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 3.68% annualized return.
XQQ.TO
- 1D
- 3.04%
- 1M
- 4.80%
- YTD
- 19.59%
- 6M
- 17.73%
- 1Y
- 35.57%
- 3Y*
- 24.45%
- 5Y*
- 14.91%
- 10Y*
- 20.19%
XCH.TO
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- -0.80%
- YTD
- -5.97%
- 6M
- -6.50%
- 1Y
- 1.55%
- 3Y*
- 11.09%
- 5Y*
- -0.28%
- 10Y*
- 3.68%
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XQQ.TO iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 19.59% | 15.77% | 24.69% | 53.25% | -33.13% | 22.76% | 46.12% | 38.92% | -1.32% | 33.41% |
XCH.TO iShares China Index ETF | -5.97% | 22.48% | 39.50% | -14.76% | -15.40% | -20.56% | 7.17% | 8.11% | -6.28% | 27.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between XQQ.TO and XCH.TO is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2011 | 0.43 |
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Industrials
Utilities
Basic Materials
Energy
Financial Services
Real Estate
Technology
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Communication Services
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Consumer Cyclical
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Consumer Defensive
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Healthcare
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Industrials
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Utilities
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Basic Materials
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Energy
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Financial Services
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
Real Estate
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
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
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XQQ.TO
XCH.TO
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO) and iShares China Index ETF (XCH.TO). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| XQQ.TO | XCH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.42 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.03 | +0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.43 | 0.09 | +2.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.08 | 0.18 | +7.89 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XQQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -38.25%, smaller than the maximum XCH.TO drawdown of -58.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XQQ.TO and XCH.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XQQ.TO | XCH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.25% | -58.02% | +19.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.68% | -16.51% | +1.83% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.72% | -27.28% | +4.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.25% | -50.32% | +12.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.25% | -58.02% | +19.77% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.45% | -21.50% | +21.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.96% | -20.40% | +14.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.42% | 8.59% | -4.17% |
Volatility
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO) has a higher volatility of 7.98% compared to iShares China Index ETF (XCH.TO) at 5.43%. This indicates that XQQ.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XCH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XQQ.TO | XCH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.98% | 5.43% | +2.55% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.18% | 13.43% | +0.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.42% | 19.09% | -1.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.77% | 29.80% | -7.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.53% | 25.72% | -3.19% |
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XQQ.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than XCH.TO's 0.87% expense ratio.
Dividends
XQQ.TO vs. XCH.TO - Dividend Comparison
XQQ.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, less than XCH.TO's 2.25% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XCH.TO iShares China Index ETF | 2.25% | 2.11% | 1.54% | 2.86% | 2.35% | 1.51% | 2.17% | 2.50% | 2.45% | 2.41% | 2.21% | 2.58% |
XQQ.TO iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 0.21% | 0.25% | 0.67% | 0.93% | 1.27% | 0.52% | 0.80% | 1.44% | 1.61% | 1.64% | 2.35% | 1.93% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XQQ.TO and XCH.TO have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XQQ.TO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XQQ.TO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for XCH.TO.
XQQ.TO is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while XCH.TO is China Equities. XQQ.TO tracks Morningstar US Market TR CAD, while XCH.TO tracks Morningstar China GR CAD. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for XQQ.TO and 0.87% for XCH.TO.
Find the right allocation for XQQ.TO and XCH.TO
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