IMCG vs. QQQN

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

IMCG (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and QQQN (VictoryShares Nasdaq Next 50 ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds - IMCG tracks the Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index while QQQN tracks the Nasdaq Q-50 Index. Both are passively managed. IMCG charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for QQQN.

Performance

IMCG vs. QQQN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) and VictoryShares Nasdaq Next 50 ETF (QQQN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

IMCG

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: -2.22%
• 6M: 16.42%
• YTD: 19.44%
• 1Y: 19.29%
• 3Y*: 15.82%
• 5Y*: 7.06%
• 10Y*: 14.11%
• ALL TIME*: 11.36%

QQQN

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	$8.72M	$8.89M	$9.03M
QQQN VictoryShares Nasdaq Next 50 ETF	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

IMCG vs. QQQN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	18.86%
QQQN VictoryShares Nasdaq Next 50 ETF	0.00%

IMCG vs. QQQN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMCG	QQQN
Technology	25.1%	47.3%
Industrials	24.5%	8.7%
Financial Services	11.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	13.7%
Healthcare	7.2%	19.9%
Basic Materials	6.8%	1.9%
Real Estate	3.9%	-
Utilities	3.3%	1.6%
Energy	3.2%	-
Communication Services	2.2%	5.5%
Consumer Defensive	2.0%	1.4%

Return for Risk

IMCG vs. QQQN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IMCG

IMCG Risk / Return Rank: 45
IMCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
IMCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
IMCG Omega Ratio Rank: 39
IMCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
IMCG Martin Ratio Rank: 55

QQQN

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IMCG vs. QQQN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) and VictoryShares Nasdaq Next 50 ETF (QQQN). 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.

	IMCG	QQQN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.02	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.53	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.70	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.41	—	—

Drawdowns

IMCG vs. QQQN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCG drawdown since its inception was -58.96%, which is greater than QQQN's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCG and QQQN.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMCG	QQQN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.96%	0.00%	-58.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.17%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.08%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.08%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.25%	0.00%	-3.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.17%	0.00%	-9.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.70%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IMCG	QQQN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.48%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.04%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.92%	0.00%	+16.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.36%	0.00%	+20.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.55%	0.00%	+20.55%

IMCG vs. QQQN - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMCG has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQN's 0.18% 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

IMCG vs. QQQN - Dividend Comparison

IMCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, while QQQN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.63%	0.78%	0.78%	0.85%	0.91%	0.41%	0.09%	0.30%	0.35%	0.45%	0.52%	0.38%
QQQN VictoryShares Nasdaq Next 50 ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Which ETF is better, IMCG or QQQN?

On fees, IMCG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMCG or QQQN?

IMCG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for QQQN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IMCG or QQQN?

IMCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.00% for QQQN.

What is the main difference between IMCG and QQQN?

IMCG tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index, while QQQN tracks Nasdaq Q-50 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VictoryShares. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for IMCG and 0.18% for QQQN.