NQ=F vs. ES=F

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

NQ=F (E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures) and ES=F (E-mini S&P 500 Futures) are both assets. Over the past 10 years, NQ=F returned 19.97%/yr vs 13.55%/yr for ES=F. Their correlation of 0.88 means they have usually moved in the same direction.

Performance

NQ=F vs. ES=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures (NQ=F) and E-mini S&P 500 Futures (ES=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NQ=F achieves a 16.06% return, which is significantly higher than ES=F's 12.55% return. Over the past 10 years, NQ=F has outperformed ES=F with an annualized return of 19.97%, while ES=F has yielded a comparatively lower 13.55% annualized return.

NQ=F

• 1D: -1.07%
• 1M: -1.32%
• 6M: 18.18%
• YTD: 16.06%
• 1Y: 27.72%
• 3Y*: 24.38%
• 5Y*: 14.37%
• 10Y*: 19.97%
• ALL TIME*: 8.34%

ES=F

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 2.19%
• 6M: 12.33%
• YTD: 12.55%
• 1Y: 22.65%
• 3Y*: 19.92%
• 5Y*: 11.86%
• 10Y*: 13.55%
• ALL TIME*: 6.60%

*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)
ES=F E-mini S&P 500 Futures	$10.89B	$10.16B	$11.15B
NQ=F E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures	$16.70B	$15.74B	$17.43B

NQ=F vs. ES=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NQ=F E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures	16.06%	19.93%	24.69%	54.45%	-32.46%	26.66%	47.22%	38.20%	-1.18%	31.76%
ES=F E-mini S&P 500 Futures	12.55%	16.12%	23.15%	24.84%	-18.86%	26.94%	16.02%	28.97%	-6.38%	19.66%

Correlation

The correlation between NQ=F and ES=F is 0.93, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.94
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2000	0.88

The correlation between NQ=F and ES=F has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NQ=F vs. ES=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

NQ=F

NQ=F Risk / Return Rank: 64
NQ=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
NQ=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
NQ=F Omega Ratio Rank: 57
NQ=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
NQ=F Martin Ratio Rank: 65

ES=F

ES=F Risk / Return Rank: 100
ES=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
ES=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
ES=F Omega Ratio Rank: 100
ES=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
ES=F Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

NQ=F vs. ES=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures (NQ=F) and E-mini S&P 500 Futures (ES=F). 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.

	NQ=F	ES=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.77	-0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.00	2.47	-0.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.32	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.34	2.54	-0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.29	10.48	-3.19

NQ=F vs. ES=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NQ=F Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the ES=F Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NQ=F and ES=F, 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

NQ=F vs. ES=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NQ=F drawdown since its inception was -78.99%, which is greater than ES=F's maximum drawdown of -57.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NQ=F and ES=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	NQ=F	ES=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.99%	-57.11%	-21.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.89%	-8.95%	-2.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.50%	-18.54%	-3.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.28%	-25.02%	-10.26%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.28%	-34.45%	-0.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.80%	-0.10%	-3.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.46%	-12.62%	-16.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.81%	2.17%	+1.64%

Volatility

NQ=F vs. ES=F - Volatility Comparison

E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures (NQ=F) has a higher volatility of 7.41% compared to E-mini S&P 500 Futures (ES=F) at 4.07%. This indicates that NQ=F's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ES=F based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NQ=F	ES=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.41%	4.07%	+3.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.98%	10.06%	+5.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.42%	12.84%	+6.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.17%	17.12%	+6.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.63%	18.10%	+4.53%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NQ=F and ES=F in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, NQ=F and ES=F 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, NQ=F or ES=F?

NQ=F has higher volatility (7.41%) compared to ES=F (4.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NQ=F dropped -78.99% vs ES=F's -57.11%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ES=F currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.44), 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.