Screener
CQQQ vs RGLO
Invesco China Technology ETF vs Russell Investments Global Equity ETF
Key differences
- RGLO costs 0.16% less per year.
- CQQQ is significantly larger than RGLO — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- CQQQ covers emerging markets markets; RGLO covers north america.
- CQQQ has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| CQQQ | RGLO | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.65% | 0.49% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $2.7B | $309M |
| Since | 2009 | 2025 |
| Dividend yield | 2.22% | — |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | emerging markets | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +30.3% | N/A |
| CAGR 3Y | +11.4% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | -6.6% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.38 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 29.76% | — |
| Max drawdown | -73.99% | -9.61% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to CQQQ and RGLO
Explore further