FELG vs. QQQM

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FELG (Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FELG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. FELG is actively managed, while QQQM is passively managed. Over the past year, FELG returned 18.27% vs 32.39% for QQQM. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FELG charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.

Performance

FELG vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) 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, FELG achieves a 2.29% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 15.99% return.

FELG

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: -3.54%
• YTD: 2.29%
• 6M: 0.84%
• 1Y: 18.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQM

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: -0.84%
• YTD: 15.99%
• 6M: 14.21%
• 1Y: 32.39%
• 3Y*: 25.97%
• 5Y*: 16.03%
• 10Y*: —

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

FELG vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FELG Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF	2.29%	18.44%	35.45%	4.37%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	15.99%	20.85%	25.68%	6.35%

Correlation

The correlation between FELG and QQQM is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2023	0.96

The correlation between FELG and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

FELG vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FELG	QQQM
Technology	54.2%	58.7%
Communication Services	12.2%	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	11.4%	11.4%
Healthcare	7.0%	3.7%
Industrials	6.1%	2.6%
Financial Services	4.4%	0.2%
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	6.4%
Utilities	1.0%	1.2%
Energy	0.7%	0.5%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%
Basic Materials	0.0%	1.0%

Return for Risk

FELG vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FELG

FELG Risk / Return Rank: 30
FELG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
FELG Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
FELG Omega Ratio Rank: 32
FELG Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
FELG Martin Ratio Rank: 29

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 60
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

FELG vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) 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.

	FELG	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.13	1.83	-0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.60	2.42	-0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.33	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.13	2.72	-1.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.77	10.03	-6.26

FELG vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FELG Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is lower than the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FELG 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

FELG vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FELG drawdown since its inception was -23.89%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FELG and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FELG	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.89%	-35.04%	+11.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.17%	-11.96%	-4.21%
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	-6.30%	-4.64%	-1.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.54%	-8.20%	+4.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.86%	3.24%	+1.62%

Volatility

FELG vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) is 6.15%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 9.00%. This indicates that FELG 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

	FELG	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.15%	9.00%	-2.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.58%	14.39%	-1.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.25%	17.83%	-1.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.99%	22.53%	-2.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.99%	22.29%	-2.30%

FELG vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FELG has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FELG vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

FELG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than QQQM's 0.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FELG Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF	0.36%	0.38%	0.44%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.45%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FELG and QQQM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, FELG 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, FELG or QQQM?

QQQM has higher volatility (9.00%) compared to FELG (6.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FELG dropped -23.89% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, FELG or QQQM?

On 1-year performance, QQQM leads with 32.39% vs 18.27% for FELG. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FELG has been the lower-risk option at 6.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FELG or QQQM?

Over the 1-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 32.39% return vs 18.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FELG or QQQM?

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for FELG.

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

QQQM has the higher dividend yield at 0.45%, compared with 0.36% for FELG.

What is the main difference between FELG and QQQM?

FELG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FELG and 0.15% for QQQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.13), 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.