IBOT vs. QQQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IBOT (VanEck Robotics ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBOT is a Technology Equities fund tracking the BlueStar® Robotics Index, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IBOT returned 23.27%/yr vs 28.89%/yr for QQQM. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IBOT charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.

Performance

IBOT vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Robotics ETF (IBOT) 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, IBOT achieves a 27.73% return, which is significantly higher than QQQM's 21.39% return.

IBOT

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: 8.89%
• YTD: 27.73%
• 6M: 28.82%
• 1Y: 57.26%
• 3Y*: 23.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQM

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 10.67%
• YTD: 21.39%
• 6M: 19.75%
• 1Y: 41.98%
• 3Y*: 28.89%
• 5Y*: 18.07%
• 10Y*: —

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

IBOT vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
IBOT VanEck Robotics ETF	27.73%	28.57%	6.39%	18.90%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	21.39%	20.85%	25.68%	29.53%

Correlation

The correlation between IBOT and QQQM is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 10, 2023	0.82

The correlation between IBOT and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

IBOT vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IBOT	QQQM
Technology	51.0%	53.8%
Industrials	43.0%	2.8%
Energy	2.8%	0.6%
Consumer Cyclical	2.3%	12.3%
Healthcare	0.9%	4.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Communication Services	-	15.8%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.7%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

IBOT vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBOT

IBOT Risk / Return Rank: 74
IBOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
IBOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
IBOT Omega Ratio Rank: 72
IBOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
IBOT Martin Ratio Rank: 74

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 74
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 75
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

IBOT vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Robotics ETF (IBOT) 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.

	IBOT	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.63	2.65	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.46	3.46	0.00
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.45	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.44	3.53	-0.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.10	13.52	+0.58
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IBOT vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBOT Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is comparable to the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBOT 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IBOT	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.63	2.65	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.82	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.19	0.85	+0.34

Drawdowns

IBOT vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBOT drawdown since its inception was -25.39%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBOT and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBOT	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.39%	-35.04%	+9.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.74%	-11.96%	-4.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.39%	-22.70%	-2.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.20%	+0.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.04%	-8.25%	+3.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.07%	3.11%	+0.96%

Volatility

IBOT vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Robotics ETF (IBOT) has a higher volatility of 7.25% compared to Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) at 4.48%. This indicates that IBOT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBOT	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.25%	4.48%	+2.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.59%	12.05%	+5.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.86%	15.91%	+5.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.09%	22.24%	-0.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.09%	22.12%	-0.03%

IBOT vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBOT has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBOT vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

IBOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, less than QQQM's 0.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
IBOT VanEck Robotics ETF	0.30%	0.38%	2.81%	2.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.41%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBOT and QQQM in my portfolio?

IBOT and QQQM have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBOT or QQQM?

IBOT has higher volatility (7.25%) compared to QQQM (4.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBOT dropped -25.39% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, IBOT or QQQM?

On 3-year performance, QQQM leads with 28.89% vs 23.27% for IBOT. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QQQM has been the lower-risk option at 4.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBOT or QQQM?

Over the 3-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 28.89% return vs 23.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBOT or QQQM?

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for IBOT.

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

QQQM has the higher dividend yield at 0.41%, compared with 0.30% for IBOT.

What is the main difference between IBOT and QQQM?

IBOT is categorized as Technology Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. IBOT tracks BlueStar® Robotics Index, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for IBOT and 0.15% for QQQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 2.63), 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.