PBW vs. QQQM
PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBW is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PBW returned -10.05%/yr vs 18.07%/yr for QQQM. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PBW charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.
Performance
PBW vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBW achieves a 48.64% return, which is significantly higher than QQQM's 21.39% return.
PBW
- 1D
- -3.49%
- 1M
- 18.16%
- YTD
- 48.64%
- 6M
- 46.91%
- 1Y
- 151.19%
- 3Y*
- 8.19%
- 5Y*
- -10.05%
- 10Y*
- 11.06%
QQQM
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 10.67%
- YTD
- 21.39%
- 6M
- 19.75%
- 1Y
- 41.98%
- 3Y*
- 28.89%
- 5Y*
- 18.07%
- 10Y*
- —
PBW vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF | 48.64% | 53.96% | -30.77% | -20.03% | -44.55% | -29.86% | 48.80% |
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 21.39% | 20.85% | 25.68% | 55.01% | -32.52% | 27.45% | 6.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between PBW and QQQM is 0.60, 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 | 0.61 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.63 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2020 | 0.61 |
The correlation between PBW and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.
PBW vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PBW
QQQM
Industrials
Basic Materials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Utilities
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Industrials
PBW
QQQM
Basic Materials
PBW
QQQM
Technology
PBW
QQQM
Consumer Cyclical
PBW
QQQM
Energy
PBW
QQQM
Utilities
PBW
QQQM
Financial Services
PBW
QQQM
Consumer Defensive
PBW
QQQM
Communication Services
PBW
-
QQQM
Healthcare
PBW
-
QQQM
Real Estate
PBW
-
QQQM
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
PBW vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank
PBW
QQQM
PBW vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) 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.
| PBW | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.45 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.16 | 3.53 | +3.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.88 | 13.52 | +6.36 |
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
| PBW | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.77 | 2.65 | +1.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.24 | 0.82 | -1.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.29 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.03 | 0.85 | -0.88 |
Drawdowns
PBW vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBW drawdown since its inception was -89.02%, which is greater than QQQM's maximum drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBW and QQQM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PBW | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.02% | -35.04% | -53.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.24% | -11.96% | -9.28% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -68.04% | -22.70% | -45.34% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -84.50% | -35.04% | -49.46% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.02% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -62.54% | -0.20% | -62.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -62.91% | -8.25% | -54.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.64% | 3.11% | +4.53% |
Volatility
PBW vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison
Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a higher volatility of 13.35% compared to Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) at 4.48%. This indicates that PBW'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
| PBW | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.35% | 4.48% | +8.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.20% | 12.05% | +16.15% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.48% | 15.91% | +24.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 42.91% | 22.24% | +20.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 38.76% | 22.12% | +16.64% |
PBW vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison
PBW has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
PBW vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison
PBW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, more than QQQM's 0.41% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF | 0.60% | 0.79% | 2.84% | 3.68% | 4.21% | 1.71% | 0.44% | 1.45% | 2.04% | 1.28% | 2.68% | 1.53% |
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 0.41% | 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
PBW and QQQM have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PBW has higher volatility (13.35%) compared to QQQM (4.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBW dropped -89.02% vs QQQM's -35.04%.
On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 18.07% vs -10.05% for PBW. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QQQM has been the lower-risk option at 4.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 18.07% return vs -10.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.
PBW has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.41% for QQQM.
PBW is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PBW and 0.15% for QQQM.
PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.77 vs 2.65), 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 PBW 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