BSCW vs. QQQI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BSCW (Invesco BulletShares 2032 Corporate Bond ETF) and QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSCW is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Invesco BulletShares Corporate Bond 2032 Index, while QQQI is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Neos. BSCW is passively managed, while QQQI is actively managed. Over the past year, BSCW returned 5.82% vs 30.41% for QQQI. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BSCW charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for QQQI.

Performance

BSCW vs. QQQI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco BulletShares 2032 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCW) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSCW achieves a 0.16% return, which is significantly lower than QQQI's 13.43% return.

BSCW

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 0.17%
• YTD: 0.16%
• 6M: 0.15%
• 1Y: 5.82%
• 3Y*: 5.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQI

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 6.91%
• YTD: 13.43%
• 6M: 12.92%
• 1Y: 30.41%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BSCW vs. QQQI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BSCW Invesco BulletShares 2032 Corporate Bond ETF	0.16%	9.00%	3.13%
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF	13.43%	18.62%	19.83%

Correlation

The correlation between BSCW and QQQI is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2024	0.22

BSCW vs. QQQI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BSCW	QQQI
Technology	12.4%	53.3%
Financial Services	10.6%	0.3%
Healthcare	10.4%	4.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	12.1%
Communication Services	8.8%	15.7%
Consumer Defensive	6.3%	7.7%
Industrials	5.9%	3.3%
Real Estate	4.8%	0.1%
Energy	4.6%	0.7%
Utilities	3.7%	1.5%
Basic Materials	2.3%	1.2%

Return for Risk

BSCW vs. QQQI — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSCW

BSCW Risk / Return Rank: 44
BSCW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
BSCW Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
BSCW Omega Ratio Rank: 42
BSCW Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BSCW Martin Ratio Rank: 43

QQQI

QQQI Risk / Return Rank: 68
QQQI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
QQQI Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
QQQI Omega Ratio Rank: 70
QQQI Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
QQQI Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

BSCW vs. QQQI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2032 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCW) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). 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.

	BSCW	QQQI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.51	2.35	-0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.26	3.12	-0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.43	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.08	3.18	-1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.80	14.27	-7.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BSCW vs. QQQI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSCW Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is lower than the QQQI Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSCW and QQQI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BSCW	QQQI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.51	2.35	-0.85
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	1.34	-0.56

Drawdowns

BSCW vs. QQQI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSCW drawdown since its inception was -8.32%, smaller than the maximum QQQI drawdown of -20.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSCW and QQQI.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSCW	QQQI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.32%	-20.00%	+11.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.81%	-9.61%	+6.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	-0.17%	-1.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.82%	-2.20%	+0.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.86%	2.14%	-1.28%

Volatility

BSCW vs. QQQI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco BulletShares 2032 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCW) is 1.20%, while NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI) has a volatility of 2.68%. This indicates that BSCW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BSCW	QQQI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.20%	2.68%	-1.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.81%	9.85%	-7.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.87%	12.98%	-9.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.24%	17.07%	-9.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.24%	17.07%	-9.83%

BSCW vs. QQQI - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSCW has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQI's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

BSCW vs. QQQI - Dividend Comparison

BSCW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.83%, less than QQQI's 13.19% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BSCW Invesco BulletShares 2032 Corporate Bond ETF	4.83%	4.81%	5.06%	4.80%	1.12%
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF	13.19%	13.82%	12.85%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSCW and QQQI in my portfolio?

BSCW and QQQI have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BSCW or QQQI?

QQQI has higher volatility (2.68%) compared to BSCW (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSCW dropped -8.32% vs QQQI's -20.00%.

Which ETF is better, BSCW or QQQI?

On 1-year performance, QQQI leads with 30.41% vs 5.82% for BSCW. On fees, BSCW is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BSCW has been the lower-risk option at 1.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BSCW or QQQI?

Over the 1-year period, QQQI has performed better with a 30.41% return vs 5.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSCW or QQQI?

BSCW is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for QQQI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BSCW or QQQI?

QQQI has the higher dividend yield at 13.19%, compared with 4.83% for BSCW.

What is the main difference between BSCW and QQQI?

BSCW is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while QQQI is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for BSCW and 0.68% for QQQI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.51), 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.