ASCE vs. QQQS

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

ASCE (Allspring SMID Core ETF) and QQQS (Invesco NASDAQ Future Gen 200 ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds. ASCE is actively managed, while QQQS is passively managed. Over the past year, ASCE returned 38.53% vs 59.24% for QQQS. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ASCE charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for QQQS.

Performance

ASCE vs. QQQS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allspring SMID Core ETF (ASCE) and Invesco NASDAQ Future Gen 200 ETF (QQQS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ASCE having a 26.69% return and QQQS slightly lower at 26.17%.

ASCE

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -2.74%
• 6M: 19.06%
• YTD: 26.69%
• 1Y: 38.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQS

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: 3.56%
• 6M: 17.97%
• YTD: 26.17%
• 1Y: 59.24%
• 3Y*: 15.55%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ASCE vs. QQQS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ASCE Allspring SMID Core ETF	26.69%	8.46%
QQQS Invesco NASDAQ Future Gen 200 ETF	26.17%	28.37%

Correlation

The correlation between ASCE and QQQS is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2025	0.79

The correlation between ASCE and QQQS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ASCE vs. QQQS — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASCE

ASCE Risk / Return Rank: 79
ASCE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
ASCE Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
ASCE Omega Ratio Rank: 69
ASCE Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
ASCE Martin Ratio Rank: 83

QQQS

QQQS Risk / Return Rank: 83
QQQS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
QQQS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
QQQS Omega Ratio Rank: 73
QQQS Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
QQQS Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

ASCE vs. QQQS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allspring SMID Core ETF (ASCE) and Invesco NASDAQ Future Gen 200 ETF (QQQS). 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.

	ASCE	QQQS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.96	2.19	-0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.83	2.89	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.34	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.20	4.37	-0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.04	13.75	-0.71

ASCE vs. QQQS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASCE Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is comparable to the QQQS Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASCE and QQQS, 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

ASCE vs. QQQS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASCE drawdown since its inception was -9.22%, smaller than the maximum QQQS drawdown of -38.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASCE and QQQS.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASCE	QQQS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.22%	-38.06%	+28.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.22%	-13.63%	+4.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-34.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.49%	-3.58%	+0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.04%	-12.95%	+10.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.96%	4.32%	-1.36%

Volatility

ASCE vs. QQQS - Volatility Comparison

Allspring SMID Core ETF (ASCE) has a higher volatility of 6.22% compared to Invesco NASDAQ Future Gen 200 ETF (QQQS) at 5.57%. This indicates that ASCE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQQS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ASCE	QQQS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.22%	5.57%	+0.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.96%	20.08%	-5.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.70%	27.18%	-7.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.60%	28.43%	-8.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.60%	28.43%	-8.83%

ASCE vs. QQQS - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASCE has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQS's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASCE vs. QQQS - Dividend Comparison

ASCE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%, less than QQQS's 2.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
ASCE Allspring SMID Core ETF	0.17%	0.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQS Invesco NASDAQ Future Gen 200 ETF	2.61%	3.48%	0.80%	0.68%	0.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASCE and QQQS in my portfolio?

ASCE and QQQS have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ASCE or QQQS?

ASCE has higher volatility (6.22%) compared to QQQS (5.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASCE dropped -9.22% vs QQQS's -38.06%.

Which ETF is better, ASCE or QQQS?

On 1-year performance, QQQS leads with 59.24% vs 38.53% for ASCE. On fees, QQQS is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, QQQS has been the lower-risk option at 5.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ASCE or QQQS?

Over the 1-year period, QQQS has performed better with a 59.24% return vs 38.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASCE or QQQS?

QQQS is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for ASCE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ASCE or QQQS?

QQQS has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 0.17% for ASCE.

What is the main difference between ASCE and QQQS?

They also come from different issuers: Allspring and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for ASCE and 0.20% for QQQS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 1.96), 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.