PGRO vs. QQQM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PGRO (Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PGRO is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Power Corporation of Canada, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. PGRO is actively managed, while QQQM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PGRO returned 11.77%/yr vs 16.11%/yr for QQQM. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. PGRO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.

Performance

PGRO vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PGRO achieves a 3.45% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 16.48% return.

PGRO

• 1D: -1.94%
• 1M: -3.41%
• YTD: 3.45%
• 6M: 2.35%
• 1Y: 17.05%
• 3Y*: 21.64%
• 5Y*: 11.77%
• 10Y*: —

QQQM

• 1D: -3.30%
• 1M: -0.42%
• YTD: 16.48%
• 6M: 15.00%
• 1Y: 34.99%
• 3Y*: 26.15%
• 5Y*: 16.11%
• 10Y*: —

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

PGRO vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PGRO Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF	3.45%	15.13%	34.01%	45.19%	-31.53%	16.63%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	16.48%	20.85%	25.68%	55.01%	-32.52%	19.87%

Correlation

The correlation between PGRO and QQQM is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2021	0.96

The correlation between PGRO and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

PGRO vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PGRO	QQQM
Technology	51.1%	58.7%
Communication Services	12.9%	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	11.4%
Healthcare	7.8%	3.7%
Financial Services	5.0%	0.2%
Industrials	4.4%	2.6%
Utilities	2.6%	1.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	6.4%
Basic Materials	2.3%	1.0%
Real Estate	0.9%	0.1%
Energy	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

PGRO vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PGRO

PGRO Risk / Return Rank: 27
PGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
PGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
PGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 28
PGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
PGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 27

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 60
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

PGRO vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) 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.

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.

	PGRO	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.01	1.97	-0.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.46	2.58	-1.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.35	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.05	2.94	-1.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.37	10.88	-7.51

PGRO vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PGRO Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is lower than the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PGRO and QQQM, 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

PGRO vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PGRO drawdown since its inception was -34.73%, roughly equal to the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGRO and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PGRO	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.73%	-35.04%	+0.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.34%	-11.96%	-4.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.31%	-22.70%	-0.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.73%	-35.04%	+0.31%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.20%	-4.24%	-1.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.21%	-8.20%	-2.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.07%	3.22%	+1.85%

Volatility

PGRO vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) is 6.47%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 9.00%. This indicates that PGRO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PGRO	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.47%	9.00%	-2.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.27%	14.43%	-1.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.05%	17.85%	-0.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.95%	22.53%	-0.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.82%	22.30%	-0.48%

PGRO vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PGRO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

PGRO vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

PGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than QQQM's 0.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PGRO Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF	0.02%	0.02%	0.08%	0.19%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.44%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PGRO and QQQM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, PGRO and QQQM 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, PGRO or QQQM?

QQQM has higher volatility (9.00%) compared to PGRO (6.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGRO dropped -34.73% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, PGRO or QQQM?

On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 16.11% vs 11.77% for PGRO. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, PGRO has been the lower-risk option at 6.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PGRO or QQQM?

Over the 5-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 16.11% return vs 11.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PGRO or QQQM?

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PGRO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PGRO or QQQM?

QQQM has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.02% for PGRO.

What is the main difference between PGRO and QQQM?

PGRO is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Power Corporation of Canada and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for PGRO and 0.15% for QQQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs 1.01), 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.