CGGR vs. QQQM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

CGGR (Capital Group Growth ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGGR is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. CGGR is actively managed, while QQQM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CGGR returned 20.04%/yr vs 22.37%/yr for QQQM. Their correlation of 0.94 means they have usually moved in the same direction. CGGR charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.

Performance

CGGR vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Growth ETF (CGGR) 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, CGGR achieves a 0.91% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 12.29% return.

CGGR

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: -3.61%
• 6M: 0.94%
• YTD: 0.91%
• 1Y: 9.80%
• 3Y*: 20.04%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.09%

QQQM

• 1D: 0.69%
• 1M: -3.45%
• 6M: 10.92%
• YTD: 12.29%
• 1Y: 24.86%
• 3Y*: 22.37%
• 5Y*: 14.31%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.51%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CGGR Capital Group Growth ETF	$114.10M	$119.53M	$120.07M
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	$962.22M	$908.74M	$1.19B

CGGR vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGGR Capital Group Growth ETF	0.91%	19.75%	32.12%	42.18%	-14.68%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	12.29%	20.85%	25.68%	55.01%	-18.53%

Correlation

The correlation between CGGR and QQQM is 0.94, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022	0.94

The correlation between CGGR and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGGR vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGGR	QQQM
Technology	40.8%	60.9%
Communication Services	15.2%	13.1%
Healthcare	10.5%	3.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.4%	10.7%
Industrials	7.6%	2.7%
Financial Services	5.3%	0.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	6.3%
Basic Materials	2.0%	1.0%
Energy	1.9%	0.5%
Real Estate	1.6%	0.1%
Utilities	0.9%	1.1%

Return for Risk

CGGR vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CGGR

CGGR Risk / Return Rank: 21
CGGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
CGGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
CGGR Omega Ratio Rank: 20
CGGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
CGGR Martin Ratio Rank: 23

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 49
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 45
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 52

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CGGR vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Growth ETF (CGGR) 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.

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.

	CGGR	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.42	1.17	-0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.70	1.66	-0.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.21	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.51	1.88	-1.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.73	6.01	-4.28

CGGR vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGGR Sharpe Ratio is 0.42, which is lower than the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGGR 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.

Drawdowns

CGGR vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGGR drawdown since its inception was -28.90%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGGR and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGGR	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.90%	-35.04%	+6.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.13%	-11.96%	-3.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.37%	-22.70%	-0.67%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.06%	-7.69%	+1.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.58%	-8.15%	+0.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.43%	3.74%	+0.69%

Volatility

CGGR vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Capital Group Growth ETF (CGGR) is 5.21%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 6.83%. This indicates that CGGR 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

	CGGR	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.21%	6.83%	-1.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.68%	15.91%	-1.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.17%	19.24%	-1.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.93%	22.74%	-0.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.93%	22.32%	-0.39%

CGGR vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGGR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGGR vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

CGGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than QQQM's 0.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CGGR Capital Group Growth ETF	0.16%	0.10%	0.33%	0.40%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.46%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGGR and QQQM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, CGGR and QQQM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CGGR or QQQM?

QQQM has higher volatility (6.83%) compared to CGGR (5.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGGR dropped -28.90% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, CGGR or QQQM?

On 3-year performance, QQQM leads with 22.37% vs 20.04% for CGGR. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, CGGR has been the lower-risk option at 5.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGGR or QQQM?

Over the 3-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 22.37% return vs 20.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGGR or QQQM?

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for CGGR.

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

QQQM has the higher dividend yield at 0.46%, compared with 0.16% for CGGR.

What is the main difference between CGGR and QQQM?

CGGR is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for CGGR and 0.15% for QQQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.17 vs 0.42), 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.