PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CUT vs. QQQ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CUT vs. QQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) and Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CUT achieves a -5.58% return, which is significantly lower than QQQ's 21.30% return. Over the past 10 years, CUT has underperformed QQQ with an annualized return of 3.93%, while QQQ has yielded a comparatively higher 21.94% annualized return.


CUT

1D
0.52%
1M
0.52%
YTD
-5.58%
6M
-2.56%
1Y
-7.17%
3Y*
0.54%
5Y*
-4.30%
10Y*
3.93%

QQQ

1D
-0.26%
1M
10.60%
YTD
21.30%
6M
19.66%
1Y
41.82%
3Y*
28.78%
5Y*
17.97%
10Y*
21.94%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CUT vs. QQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CUT
Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF
-5.58%-5.92%1.82%8.65%-16.38%12.29%18.05%23.35%-21.70%30.41%
QQQ
Invesco QQQ ETF
21.30%20.77%25.58%54.86%-32.58%27.42%48.62%38.96%-0.13%32.66%

Correlation

The correlation between CUT and QQQ is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.32

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.41

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2007

0.62

Over the past year, the correlation between CUT and QQQ has dropped to 0.32 - well below their long-term average of 0.62, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

CUT vs. QQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CUT
QQQ

Basic Materials

51.8%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

39.1%
12.3%

Industrials

5.1%
2.8%

Real Estate

4.5%
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

0.2%
7.7%

Financial Services

0.1%
0.2%

Technology

0.1%
53.8%

Communication Services

-

15.8%

Energy

-

0.6%

Healthcare

-

4.2%

Utilities

-

1.4%

Basic Materials

CUT
51.8%
QQQ
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

CUT
39.1%
QQQ
12.3%

Industrials

CUT
5.1%
QQQ
2.8%

Real Estate

CUT
4.5%
QQQ
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

CUT
0.2%
QQQ
7.7%

Financial Services

CUT
0.1%
QQQ
0.2%

Technology

CUT
0.1%
QQQ
53.8%

Communication Services

CUT

-

QQQ
15.8%

Energy

CUT

-

QQQ
0.6%

Healthcare

CUT

-

QQQ
4.2%

Utilities

CUT

-

QQQ
1.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

CUT vs. QQQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CUT
CUT Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
CUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
CUT Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
CUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
CUT Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank

QQQ
QQQ Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
QQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
QQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CUT vs. QQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) 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.


CUTQQQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.89

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.95

1.45

-0.50

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.37

3.51

-3.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.81

13.49

-14.30

CUT vs. QQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CUT Sharpe Ratio is -0.39, which is lower than the QQQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CUT 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CUTQQQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.39

2.64

-3.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.23

0.81

-1.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.20

0.99

-0.79

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.11

0.41

-0.30

Drawdowns

CUT vs. QQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CUT drawdown since its inception was -70.03%, smaller than the maximum QQQ drawdown of -82.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUT and QQQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CUTQQQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-70.03%

-82.97%

+12.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.62%

-11.96%

-7.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.23%

-22.77%

+0.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.40%

-35.12%

+4.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.76%

-35.12%

-10.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.99%

-0.26%

-22.73%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.26%

-32.79%

+17.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.88%

3.11%

+5.77%

Volatility

CUT vs. QQQ - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) has a higher volatility of 5.90% compared to Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ) at 4.49%. This indicates that CUT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CUTQQQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.90%

4.49%

+1.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.05%

12.10%

+1.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.57%

15.94%

+2.63%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.48%

22.38%

-3.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.22%

22.29%

-2.07%

CUT vs. QQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CUT has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQ's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

CUT vs. QQQ - Dividend Comparison

CUT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.61%, more than QQQ's 0.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CUT
Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF
2.61%2.46%3.05%2.44%2.58%1.57%1.65%2.67%3.43%1.57%2.08%1.52%
QQQ
Invesco QQQ ETF
0.38%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


CUT and QQQ have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CUT has higher volatility (5.90%) compared to QQQ (4.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CUT dropped -70.03% vs QQQ's -82.97%.

On 10-year performance, QQQ leads with 21.94% vs 3.93% for CUT. On fees, QQQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, QQQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QQQ has performed better with a 21.94% return vs 3.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QQQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CUT.

CUT has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 0.38% for QQQ.

CUT is categorized as Materials, while QQQ is Nasdaq-100. CUT tracks Beacon Global Timber Index, while QQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CUT and 0.18% for QQQ.

QQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs -0.39), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CUT and QQQ

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer