CUT vs. QQQ
CUT (Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF) and QQQ (Invesco QQQ ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CUT is a Materials fund tracking the Beacon Global Timber Index, while QQQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CUT returned 3.93%/yr vs 21.94%/yr for QQQ. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CUT charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for QQQ.
Performance
CUT vs. QQQ - Performance Comparison
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%
CUT vs. QQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Technology
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
CUT
QQQ
Consumer Cyclical
CUT
QQQ
Industrials
CUT
QQQ
Real Estate
CUT
QQQ
Consumer Defensive
CUT
QQQ
Financial Services
CUT
QQQ
Technology
CUT
QQQ
Communication Services
CUT
-
QQQ
Energy
CUT
-
QQQ
Healthcare
CUT
-
QQQ
Utilities
CUT
-
QQQ
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
CUT
QQQ
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.
| CUT | QQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CUT | QQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| CUT | QQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.99% | -0.26% | -22.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.26% | -32.79% | +17.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| CUT | QQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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