GRN vs. QQQ
GRN (iPath Series B Carbon ETN) and QQQ (Invesco QQQ ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GRN is a Commodities fund tracking the Barclays Global Carbon II Index, while QQQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GRN returned 9.74%/yr vs 17.97%/yr for QQQ. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GRN charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for QQQ.
Performance
GRN vs. QQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GRN achieves a -8.22% return, which is significantly lower than QQQ's 21.30% return.
GRN
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 7.79%
- YTD
- -8.22%
- 6M
- -4.01%
- 1Y
- 11.88%
- 3Y*
- 0.53%
- 5Y*
- 9.74%
- 10Y*
- —
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%
GRN vs. QQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GRN iPath Series B Carbon ETN | -8.22% | 20.33% | -7.34% | -2.99% | -0.07% | 147.21% | 30.47% | -8.41% |
QQQ Invesco QQQ ETF | 21.30% | 20.77% | 25.58% | 54.86% | -32.58% | 27.42% | 48.62% | 11.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between GRN and QQQ is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 11, 2019 | 0.14 |
The correlation between GRN and QQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (5 years) to 0.21 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
GRN vs. QQQ — Risk / Return Rank
GRN
QQQ
GRN vs. QQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) 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.
| GRN | QQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.43 | 2.64 | -2.21 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.74 | 3.45 | -2.71 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.10 | 1.45 | -0.35 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.45 | 3.51 | -3.07 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.15 | 13.49 | -12.35 |
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
| GRN | QQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 | 2.64 | -2.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.25 | 0.81 | -0.56 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.99 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 0.41 | +0.01 |
Drawdowns
GRN vs. QQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GRN drawdown since its inception was -47.96%, smaller than the maximum QQQ drawdown of -82.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRN and QQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GRN | QQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.96% | -82.97% | +35.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.39% | -11.96% | -18.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -45.30% | -22.77% | -22.53% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.96% | -35.12% | -12.84% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -19.39% | -0.26% | -19.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.54% | -32.79% | +15.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.80% | 3.11% | +8.69% |
Volatility
GRN vs. QQQ - Volatility Comparison
iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) has a higher volatility of 6.78% compared to Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ) at 4.49%. This indicates that GRN'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
| GRN | QQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.78% | 4.49% | +2.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.47% | 12.10% | +12.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.77% | 15.94% | +11.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 39.84% | 22.38% | +17.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 41.96% | 22.29% | +19.67% |
GRN vs. QQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
GRN has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQ's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
GRN vs. QQQ - Dividend Comparison
GRN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GRN iPath Series B Carbon ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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
GRN and QQQ have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GRN has higher volatility (6.78%) compared to QQQ (4.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GRN dropped -47.96% vs QQQ's -82.97%.
On 5-year performance, QQQ leads with 17.97% vs 9.74% for GRN. 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 5-year period, QQQ has performed better with a 17.97% return vs 9.74%. 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 0.75% for GRN.
QQQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.00% for GRN.
GRN is categorized as Commodities, while QQQ is Nasdaq-100. GRN tracks Barclays Global Carbon II Index, while QQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Barclays Capital and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GRN and 0.18% for QQQ.
QQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 0.43), 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 GRN 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