MID vs. QQJG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MID (American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF) and QQJG (Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. MID is actively managed, while QQJG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MID returned 14.41%/yr vs 14.09%/yr for QQJG. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MID charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for QQJG.

Performance

MID vs. QQJG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF (MID) and Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQJG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MID achieves a 5.47% return, which is significantly higher than QQJG's 1.44% return.

MID

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 3.85%
• YTD: 5.47%
• 6M: 2.66%
• 1Y: 6.76%
• 3Y*: 14.41%
• 5Y*: 6.25%
• 10Y*: —

QQJG

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 1.44%
• 6M: 1.92%
• 1Y: 18.92%
• 3Y*: 14.09%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MID vs. QQJG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MID American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF	5.47%	8.22%	19.40%	22.20%	-27.44%	-5.81%
QQJG Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF	1.44%	18.05%	14.67%	17.20%	-27.69%	0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between MID and QQJG is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2021	0.87

Over the past year, the correlation between MID and QQJG has dropped to 0.66 - well below their long-term average of 0.87, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MID vs. QQJG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MID	QQJG
Industrials	25.5%	6.4%
Technology	21.9%	44.5%
Healthcare	18.7%	18.2%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	14.3%
Energy	7.3%	1.6%
Financial Services	6.1%	0.1%
Utilities	4.4%	-
Basic Materials	2.3%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	1.6%	3.4%
Communication Services	-	6.2%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

MID vs. QQJG — Risk / Return Rank

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

MID

MID Risk / Return Rank: 15
MID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
MID Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
MID Omega Ratio Rank: 14
MID Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
MID Martin Ratio Rank: 16

QQJG

QQJG Risk / Return Rank: 45
QQJG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
QQJG Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
QQJG Omega Ratio Rank: 46
QQJG Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
QQJG Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

MID vs. QQJG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF (MID) and Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQJG). 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.

	MID	QQJG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.41	1.37	-0.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.68	1.97	-1.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.29	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.49	2.42	-1.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.45	8.87	-7.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MID vs. QQJG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MID Sharpe Ratio is 0.41, which is lower than the QQJG Sharpe Ratio of 1.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MID and QQJG, 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

	MID	QQJG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41	1.37	-0.96
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	0.17	+0.24

Drawdowns

MID vs. QQJG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MID drawdown since its inception was -40.15%, which is greater than QQJG's maximum drawdown of -36.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MID and QQJG.

Drawdown Indicators

	MID	QQJG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.15%	-36.76%	-3.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.89%	-7.93%	-5.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.92%	-23.48%	-0.44%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.15%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.48%	-2.09%	+1.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.44%	-15.32%	+1.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.66%	2.15%	+2.51%

Volatility

MID vs. QQJG - Volatility Comparison

American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF (MID) has a higher volatility of 4.88% compared to Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQJG) at 0.00%. This indicates that MID's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQJG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MID	QQJG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.88%	0.00%	+4.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.00%	8.32%	+4.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.73%	14.05%	+2.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.63%	21.70%	+1.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.92%	21.70%	+2.22%

MID vs. QQJG - Expense Ratio Comparison

MID has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than QQJG's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

MID vs. QQJG - Dividend Comparison

MID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, less than QQJG's 13.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MID American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF	0.15%	0.18%	0.17%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%
QQJG Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF	13.86%	0.68%	0.65%	0.54%	0.70%	0.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MID and QQJG in my portfolio?

MID and QQJG have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MID or QQJG?

MID has higher volatility (4.88%) compared to QQJG (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MID dropped -40.15% vs QQJG's -36.76%.

Which ETF is better, MID or QQJG?

On 3-year performance, MID leads with 14.41% vs 14.09% for QQJG. On fees, QQJG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, QQJG has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MID or QQJG?

Over the 3-year period, MID has performed better with a 14.41% return vs 14.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MID or QQJG?

QQJG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for MID.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MID or QQJG?

QQJG has the higher dividend yield at 13.86%, compared with 0.15% for MID.

What is the main difference between MID and QQJG?

They also come from different issuers: American Century and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for MID and 0.20% for QQJG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQJG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.41), 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.