AAAU vs. QQQ

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) and QQQ (Invesco QQQ ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AAAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price, while QQQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AAAU returned 17.33%/yr vs 16.85%/yr for QQQ. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.18% expense ratio.

Performance

AAAU vs. QQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) and Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAAU achieves a -2.40% return, which is significantly lower than QQQ's 17.57% return.

AAAU

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -10.17%
• YTD: -2.40%
• 6M: -2.14%
• 1Y: 24.10%
• 3Y*: 29.19%
• 5Y*: 17.33%
• 10Y*: —

QQQ

• 1D: 0.59%
• 1M: 0.93%
• YTD: 17.57%
• 6M: 17.85%
• 1Y: 35.82%
• 3Y*: 26.43%
• 5Y*: 16.85%
• 10Y*: 21.79%

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

AAAU vs. QQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF	-2.40%	64.06%	26.91%	12.96%	-0.50%	-4.01%	25.02%	18.17%	8.28%
QQQ Invesco QQQ ETF	17.57%	20.77%	25.58%	54.86%	-32.58%	27.42%	48.62%	38.96%	-14.59%

Correlation

The correlation between AAAU and QQQ is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.14
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2018	0.08

The correlation between AAAU and QQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.08 (all time) to 0.22 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AAAU vs. QQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AAAU	QQQ
Real Estate	100.0%	0.1%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Communication Services	-	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.7%
Energy	-	0.6%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Technology	-	53.8%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

AAAU vs. QQQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

AAAU

AAAU Risk / Return Rank: 26
AAAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
AAAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
AAAU Omega Ratio Rank: 31
AAAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
AAAU Martin Ratio Rank: 24

QQQ

QQQ Risk / Return Rank: 71
QQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
QQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
QQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 73
QQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
QQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

AAAU vs. QQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) and Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ). 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.

	AAAU	QQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	2.09	-1.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.26	2.73	-1.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.37	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.99	3.01	-2.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.86	11.22	-8.36

AAAU vs. QQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAAU Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the QQQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAAU and QQQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AAAU vs. QQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAAU drawdown since its inception was -24.38%, smaller than the maximum QQQ drawdown of -82.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAAU and QQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	AAAU	QQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.38%	-82.97%	+58.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.38%	-11.96%	-12.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.38%	-22.77%	-1.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.38%	-35.12%	+10.74%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.95%	-3.33%	-18.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.23%	-32.75%	+26.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.44%	3.20%	+5.24%

Volatility

AAAU vs. QQQ - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) and Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ) have volatilities of 7.77% and 7.56%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AAAU	QQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.77%	7.56%	+0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.88%	13.81%	+10.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.10%	17.19%	+9.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.06%	22.55%	-4.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.13%	22.38%	-5.25%

AAAU vs. QQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AAAU and QQQ have an expense ratio of 0.18%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

AAAU vs. QQQ - Dividend Comparison

AAAU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQ Invesco QQQ ETF	0.39%	0.45%	0.56%	0.62%	0.80%	0.43%	0.55%	0.74%	0.91%	0.84%	1.06%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AAAU and QQQ in my portfolio?

AAAU and QQQ have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AAAU or QQQ?

AAAU has higher volatility (7.77%) compared to QQQ (7.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAAU dropped -24.38% vs QQQ's -82.97%.

Which ETF is better, AAAU or QQQ?

On 5-year performance, AAAU leads with 17.33% vs 16.85% for QQQ. Both ETFs have the same 0.18% expense ratio. On volatility, QQQ has been the lower-risk option at 7.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AAAU or QQQ?

Over the 5-year period, AAAU has performed better with a 17.33% return vs 16.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AAAU or QQQ?

AAAU and QQQ have the same expense ratio: 0.18% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AAAU or QQQ?

QQQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.39%, compared with 0.00% for AAAU.

What is the main difference between AAAU and QQQ?

AAAU is categorized as Gold, while QQQ is Nasdaq-100. AAAU tracks LBMA Gold PM Price, while QQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Invesco.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 0.89), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.