IBBQ vs. XLG

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

IBBQ (Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBBQ is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IBBQ returned 6.46%/yr vs 13.84%/yr for XLG. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IBBQ charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

IBBQ vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBBQ) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBBQ achieves a 15.12% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 3.75% return.

IBBQ

• 1D: -1.45%
• 1M: 10.41%
• 6M: 13.70%
• YTD: 15.12%
• 1Y: 49.59%
• 3Y*: 17.72%
• 5Y*: 6.46%
• 10Y*: —

XLG

• 1D: -1.13%
• 1M: 0.12%
• 6M: 2.98%
• YTD: 3.75%
• 1Y: 17.41%
• 3Y*: 20.97%
• 5Y*: 13.84%
• 10Y*: 16.49%

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

IBBQ vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IBBQ Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF	15.12%	33.32%	-0.63%	4.73%	-10.41%	-6.24%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	3.75%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	17.08%

Correlation

The correlation between IBBQ and XLG is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2021	0.50

The correlation between IBBQ and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (1 year) to 0.50 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IBBQ vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IBBQ	XLG
Healthcare	93.5%	6.7%
Consumer Defensive	0.2%	5.0%
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	10.1%
Financial Services	0.1%	9.9%
Industrials	0.0%	2.1%
Basic Materials	-	0.6%
Communication Services	-	13.9%
Energy	-	2.2%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	48.7%
Utilities	-	0.8%

Return for Risk

IBBQ vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBBQ

IBBQ Risk / Return Rank: 91
IBBQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
IBBQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
IBBQ Omega Ratio Rank: 84
IBBQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
IBBQ Martin Ratio Rank: 93

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 40
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 42
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 38

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.

IBBQ vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBBQ) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.

	IBBQ	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.45	1.24	+1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.35	1.75	+1.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.22	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.98	1.41	+4.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.92	4.71	+14.22

IBBQ vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBBQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is higher than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBBQ and XLG, 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

IBBQ vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBBQ drawdown since its inception was -37.94%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBBQ and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBBQ	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.94%	-52.39%	+14.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.34%	-12.41%	+4.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.66%	-20.70%	-2.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.94%	-28.02%	-9.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.65%	-4.94%	+0.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.50%	-7.63%	-8.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.63%	3.71%	-1.08%

Volatility

IBBQ vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBBQ) has a higher volatility of 6.21% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 4.83%. This indicates that IBBQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBBQ	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.21%	4.83%	+1.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.76%	11.06%	+4.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.34%	14.13%	+6.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.02%	18.83%	+3.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.90%	18.87%	+3.03%

IBBQ vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBBQ has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IBBQ vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

IBBQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.79%, more than XLG's 0.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IBBQ Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF	0.79%	0.90%	1.14%	0.81%	0.76%	0.63%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.65%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBBQ and XLG in my portfolio?

IBBQ and XLG have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBBQ or XLG?

IBBQ has higher volatility (6.21%) compared to XLG (4.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBBQ dropped -37.94% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, IBBQ or XLG?

On 5-year performance, XLG leads with 13.84% vs 6.46% for IBBQ. On fees, IBBQ is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBBQ or XLG?

Over the 5-year period, XLG has performed better with a 13.84% return vs 6.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBBQ or XLG?

IBBQ is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XLG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBBQ or XLG?

IBBQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.79%, compared with 0.65% for XLG.

What is the main difference between IBBQ and XLG?

IBBQ is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. IBBQ tracks Nasdaq Biotechnology Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IBBQ and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBBQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 1.24), 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.