IWL vs. QQQM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWL (iShares Russell Top 200 ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWL is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Top 200 Index, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWL returned 13.60%/yr vs 16.11%/yr for QQQM. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

IWL vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) 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, IWL achieves a 6.83% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 16.48% return.

IWL

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: -1.88%
• YTD: 6.83%
• 6M: 5.97%
• 1Y: 23.48%
• 3Y*: 21.53%
• 5Y*: 13.60%
• 10Y*: 16.38%

QQQM

• 1D: -3.30%
• 1M: -0.42%
• YTD: 16.48%
• 6M: 15.00%
• 1Y: 34.99%
• 3Y*: 26.15%
• 5Y*: 16.11%
• 10Y*: —

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

IWL vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF	6.83%	19.09%	27.12%	29.77%	-19.89%	27.79%	6.24%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	16.48%	20.85%	25.68%	55.01%	-32.52%	27.45%	6.64%

Correlation

The correlation between IWL and QQQM is 0.95, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2020	0.95

The correlation between IWL and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWL vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWL	QQQM
Technology	41.8%	58.7%
Communication Services	12.1%	14.3%
Financial Services	11.1%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	9.7%	11.4%
Healthcare	8.5%	3.7%
Industrials	6.3%	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	6.4%
Energy	2.4%	0.5%
Basic Materials	1.4%	1.0%
Utilities	1.2%	1.2%
Real Estate	0.9%	0.1%

Return for Risk

IWL vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWL

IWL Risk / Return Rank: 55
IWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
IWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
IWL Omega Ratio Rank: 55
IWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
IWL Martin Ratio Rank: 60

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 60
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

IWL vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) 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.

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.

	IWL	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	1.97	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.49	2.58	-0.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.35	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.40	2.94	-0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.25	10.88	-0.64

IWL vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWL Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWL 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.

Drawdowns

IWL vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWL drawdown since its inception was -32.71%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWL and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWL	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.71%	-35.04%	+2.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.83%	-11.96%	+2.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.15%	-22.70%	+3.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.65%	-35.04%	+9.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.71%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.71%	-4.24%	+0.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.88%	-8.20%	+4.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.30%	3.22%	-0.92%

Volatility

IWL vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) is 5.02%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 9.00%. This indicates that IWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWL	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.02%	9.00%	-3.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.11%	14.43%	-4.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.89%	17.85%	-4.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.28%	22.53%	-5.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.11%	22.30%	-4.19%

IWL vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IWL and QQQM have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IWL vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

IWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, more than QQQM's 0.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF	0.87%	0.90%	1.04%	1.30%	1.54%	1.12%	1.30%	1.96%	1.93%	1.69%	1.96%	2.14%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.44%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWL and QQQM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, IWL and QQQM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, IWL or QQQM?

QQQM has higher volatility (9.00%) compared to IWL (5.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWL dropped -32.71% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, IWL or QQQM?

On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 16.11% vs 13.60% for IWL. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, IWL has been the lower-risk option at 5.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWL or QQQM?

Over the 5-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 16.11% return vs 13.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWL or QQQM?

IWL and QQQM have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

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

IWL has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.44% for QQQM.

What is the main difference between IWL and QQQM?

IWL is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. IWL tracks Russell Top 200 Index, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs 1.83), 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.