MT vs. QQQM
MT (ArcelorMittal) is a stock, while QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) is Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Over the past 5 years, MT returned 18.51%/yr vs 17.94%/yr for QQQM. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
MT vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MT achieves a 57.98% return, which is significantly higher than QQQM's 20.73% return.
MT
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- 23.45%
- YTD
- 57.98%
- 6M
- 68.87%
- 1Y
- 138.97%
- 3Y*
- 41.66%
- 5Y*
- 18.51%
- 10Y*
- 17.17%
QQQM
- 1D
- -0.54%
- 1M
- 8.67%
- YTD
- 20.73%
- 6M
- 19.22%
- 1Y
- 40.83%
- 3Y*
- 28.64%
- 5Y*
- 17.94%
- 10Y*
- —
MT vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MT ArcelorMittal | 57.98% | 100.13% | -16.92% | 10.28% | -16.44% | 40.29% | 66.30% |
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 20.73% | 20.85% | 25.68% | 55.01% | -32.52% | 27.45% | 6.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between MT and QQQM is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2020 | 0.41 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
MT vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank
MT
QQQM
MT vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ArcelorMittal (MT) 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.
| MT | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.86 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.57 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | 1.44 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.85 | 3.43 | +1.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.01 | 13.15 | +3.86 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MT | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.44 | 2.58 | +0.86 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 | 0.81 | -0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.38 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.04 | 0.84 | -0.80 |
Drawdowns
MT vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MT drawdown since its inception was -97.34%, which is greater than QQQM's maximum drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MT and QQQM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MT | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -97.34% | -35.04% | -62.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -28.84% | -11.96% | -16.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.83% | -22.70% | -8.13% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.99% | -35.04% | -10.95% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -81.10% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -58.22% | -0.75% | -57.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -69.41% | -8.24% | -61.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.20% | 3.11% | +5.09% |
Volatility
MT vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison
ArcelorMittal (MT) has a higher volatility of 14.95% compared to Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) at 4.51%. This indicates that MT'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MT | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.95% | 4.51% | +10.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 34.12% | 12.06% | +22.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.65% | 15.91% | +24.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 39.66% | 22.23% | +17.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.86% | 22.11% | +22.75% |
Dividends
MT vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison
MT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, more than QQQM's 0.42% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MT ArcelorMittal | 0.80% | 1.21% | 2.16% | 1.55% | 1.45% | 0.94% | 0.00% | 1.14% | 0.48% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 4.03% |
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 0.42% | 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
MT and QQQM have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MT has higher volatility (14.95%) compared to QQQM (4.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MT dropped -97.34% vs QQQM's -35.04%.
MT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.44 vs 2.58), 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.
Find the right allocation for MT and QQQM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer