BSCX vs. QQQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BSCX (Invesco BulletShares 2033 Corporate Bond ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSCX is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Invesco BulletShares USD Corporate Bond 2033 Index, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BSCX returned 6.09% vs 41.98% for QQQM. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BSCX charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.

Performance

BSCX vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco BulletShares 2033 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCX) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSCX achieves a 0.17% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 21.39% return.

BSCX

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 0.17%
• 6M: 0.21%
• 1Y: 6.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQM

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 10.67%
• YTD: 21.39%
• 6M: 19.75%
• 1Y: 41.98%
• 3Y*: 28.89%
• 5Y*: 18.07%
• 10Y*: —

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

BSCX vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BSCX Invesco BulletShares 2033 Corporate Bond ETF	0.17%	9.31%	1.73%	7.88%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	21.39%	20.85%	25.68%	12.62%

Correlation

The correlation between BSCX and QQQM is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2023	0.24

BSCX vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BSCX	QQQM
Healthcare	12.2%	4.2%
Technology	10.2%	53.8%
Financial Services	10.2%	0.2%
Communication Services	9.3%	15.8%
Energy	8.9%	0.6%
Consumer Cyclical	7.4%	12.3%
Industrials	7.4%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.9%	7.7%
Utilities	5.7%	1.4%
Real Estate	4.8%	0.1%
Basic Materials	0.9%	1.1%

Return for Risk

BSCX vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSCX

BSCX Risk / Return Rank: 43
BSCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
BSCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
BSCX Omega Ratio Rank: 40
BSCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BSCX Martin Ratio Rank: 43

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 74
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 75
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

BSCX vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2033 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCX) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). 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.

	BSCX	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	2.65	-1.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.23	3.46	-1.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.45	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.11	3.53	-1.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.83	13.52	-6.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BSCX vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSCX Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is lower than the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSCX and QQQM, 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

	BSCX	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.49	2.65	-1.16
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.82	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.16	0.85	+0.32

Drawdowns

BSCX vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSCX drawdown since its inception was -5.13%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSCX and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSCX	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.13%	-35.04%	+29.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.90%	-11.96%	+9.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.70%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.40%	-0.20%	-1.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.37%	-8.25%	+6.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.89%	3.11%	-2.22%

Volatility

BSCX vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco BulletShares 2033 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCX) is 1.32%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 4.48%. This indicates that BSCX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BSCX	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.32%	4.48%	-3.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.97%	12.05%	-9.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.11%	15.91%	-11.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.08%	22.24%	-16.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.08%	22.12%	-16.04%

BSCX vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSCX has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

BSCX vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

BSCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.89%, more than QQQM's 0.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BSCX Invesco BulletShares 2033 Corporate Bond ETF	4.89%	4.82%	5.00%	1.08%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.41%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSCX and QQQM in my portfolio?

BSCX and QQQM have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BSCX or QQQM?

QQQM has higher volatility (4.48%) compared to BSCX (1.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSCX dropped -5.13% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, BSCX or QQQM?

On 1-year performance, QQQM leads with 41.98% vs 6.09% for BSCX. On fees, BSCX is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BSCX has been the lower-risk option at 1.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BSCX or QQQM?

Over the 1-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 41.98% return vs 6.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSCX or QQQM?

BSCX is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for QQQM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BSCX or QQQM?

BSCX has the higher dividend yield at 4.89%, compared with 0.41% for QQQM.

What is the main difference between BSCX and QQQM?

BSCX is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. BSCX tracks Invesco BulletShares USD Corporate Bond 2033 Index, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for BSCX and 0.15% for QQQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.49), 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.