HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO
HXQ.TO (Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF) and QQQQ.TO (Mackenzie NASDAQ 100 Index ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, from Horizons and Mackenzie respectively. Both are passively managed. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.
Performance
HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with HXQ.TO having a 20.53% return and QQQQ.TO slightly higher at 20.59%.
HXQ.TO
- 1D
- -2.86%
- 1M
- 2.47%
- YTD
- 20.53%
- 6M
- 19.26%
- 1Y
- 39.36%
- 3Y*
- 29.01%
- 5Y*
- 19.15%
- 10Y*
- 22.49%
QQQQ.TO
- 1D
- -2.71%
- 1M
- 2.61%
- YTD
- 20.59%
- 6M
- 19.51%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
HXQ.TO Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF | 20.53% | 5.95% |
QQQQ.TO Mackenzie NASDAQ 100 Index ETF | 20.59% | 7.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between HXQ.TO and QQQQ.TO is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2025 | 0.63 |
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
HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank
HXQ.TO
QQQQ.TO
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF (HXQ.TO) and Mackenzie NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (QQQQ.TO). 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.
| HXQ.TO | QQQQ.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.18 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.07 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HXQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -31.60%, which is greater than QQQQ.TO's maximum drawdown of -12.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HXQ.TO and QQQQ.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HXQ.TO | QQQQ.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.60% | -12.27% | -19.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.43% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.58% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.60% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -31.60% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.00% | -2.77% | -0.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.73% | -3.16% | -2.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.92% | — | — |
Volatility
HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HXQ.TO | QQQQ.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.43% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.93% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.40% | 19.23% | -1.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.03% | 19.23% | +1.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.99% | 19.23% | +1.76% |
HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both HXQ.TO and QQQQ.TO have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
HXQ.TO vs. QQQQ.TO - Dividend Comparison
HXQ.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQQQ.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
HXQ.TO Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QQQQ.TO Mackenzie NASDAQ 100 Index ETF | 0.09% | 0.11% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HXQ.TO and QQQQ.TO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HXQ.TO and QQQQ.TO have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.
Both ETFs track NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Horizons and Mackenzie.
Find the right allocation for HXQ.TO and QQQQ.TO
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