IWM vs. QQQI

Last updated Jul 22, 2026

IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while QQQI is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Neos. IWM is passively managed, while QQQI is actively managed. Over the past year, IWM returned 35.31% vs 19.87% for QQQI. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for QQQI.

Performance

IWM vs. QQQI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 20.97% return, which is significantly higher than QQQI's 10.04% return.

IWM

• 1D: 1.45%
• 1M: 0.32%
• 6M: 13.40%
• YTD: 20.97%
• 1Y: 35.31%
• 3Y*: 16.47%
• 5Y*: 7.63%
• 10Y*: 10.81%
• ALL TIME*: 8.82%

QQQI

• 1D: 1.77%
• 1M: -2.68%
• 6M: 10.99%
• YTD: 10.04%
• 1Y: 19.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.68%

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

IWM vs. QQQI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	20.97%	12.66%	12.11%
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF	10.04%	18.62%	19.44%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and QQQI is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2024	0.67

The correlation between IWM and QQQI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWM vs. QQQI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWM	QQQI
Healthcare	20.5%	3.6%
Financial Services	17.9%	0.2%
Technology	14.3%	58.9%
Industrials	13.9%	4.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.0%	10.5%
Real Estate	6.6%	0.1%
Energy	5.8%	0.5%
Basic Materials	4.3%	1.0%
Utilities	2.9%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	6.2%
Communication Services	1.9%	13.2%

Return for Risk

IWM vs. QQQI — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 77
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 70
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

QQQI

QQQI Risk / Return Rank: 53
QQQI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
QQQI Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
QQQI Omega Ratio Rank: 49
QQQI Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
QQQI Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

IWM vs. QQQI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). 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.

	IWM	QQQI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	1.27	+0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.59	1.76	+0.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.24	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.22	2.08	+1.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.33	8.34	+2.99

IWM vs. QQQI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is higher than the QQQI Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and QQQI, 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

IWM vs. QQQI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than QQQI's maximum drawdown of -20.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and QQQI.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWM	QQQI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.05%	-20.00%	-39.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.03%	-9.61%	-1.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.50%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.91%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.13%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.30%	-3.16%	+1.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.72%	-2.22%	-8.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.12%	2.39%	+0.73%

Volatility

IWM vs. QQQI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) is 3.36%, while NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI) has a volatility of 6.40%. This indicates that IWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWM	QQQI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.36%	6.40%	-3.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.23%	13.06%	+1.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.38%	15.68%	+3.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.49%	17.62%	+4.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.01%	17.62%	+5.39%

IWM vs. QQQI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQI's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWM vs. QQQI - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than QQQI's 13.81% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	0.90%	1.04%	1.15%	1.35%	1.48%	0.94%	1.04%	1.26%	1.40%	1.26%	1.38%	1.54%
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF	13.81%	13.82%	12.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWM and QQQI in my portfolio?

IWM and QQQI have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWM or QQQI?

QQQI has higher volatility (6.40%) compared to IWM (3.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs QQQI's -20.00%.

Which ETF is better, IWM or QQQI?

On 1-year performance, IWM leads with 35.31% vs 19.87% for QQQI. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWM has been the lower-risk option at 3.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWM or QQQI?

Over the 1-year period, IWM has performed better with a 35.31% return vs 19.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWM or QQQI?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for QQQI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWM or QQQI?

QQQI has the higher dividend yield at 13.81%, compared with 0.90% for IWM.

What is the main difference between IWM and QQQI?

IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while QQQI is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.68% for QQQI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.27), 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.