PIPE vs. QQQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PIPE (Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PIPE is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Invesco, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. PIPE is actively managed, while QQQM is passively managed. Over the past year, PIPE returned 27.43% vs 41.98% for QQQM. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PIPE charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.

Performance

PIPE vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) 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, PIPE achieves a 25.83% return, which is significantly higher than QQQM's 21.39% return.

PIPE

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: -1.32%
• YTD: 25.83%
• 6M: 25.88%
• 1Y: 27.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQM

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 10.67%
• YTD: 21.39%
• 6M: 19.75%
• 1Y: 41.98%
• 3Y*: 28.89%
• 5Y*: 18.07%
• 10Y*: —

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

PIPE vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	25.83%	0.14%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	21.39%	14.99%

Correlation

The correlation between PIPE and QQQM is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.15

The correlation between PIPE and QQQM shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (1 year) to 0.15 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PIPE vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PIPE	QQQM
Energy	96.7%	0.6%
Utilities	2.0%	1.4%
Financial Services	1.3%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Communication Services	-	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.7%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	53.8%

Return for Risk

PIPE vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PIPE

PIPE Risk / Return Rank: 60
PIPE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
PIPE Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
PIPE Omega Ratio Rank: 55
PIPE Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
PIPE Martin Ratio Rank: 58

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 74
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 75
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

PIPE vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) 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.

	PIPE	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	2.65	-0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.58	3.46	-0.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.45	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.76	3.53	+0.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.07	13.52	-3.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PIPE vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PIPE Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is comparable to the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PIPE 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PIPE	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.92	2.65	-0.73
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.82	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.06	0.85	+0.21

Drawdowns

PIPE vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PIPE drawdown since its inception was -15.69%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PIPE and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PIPE	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.69%	-35.04%	+19.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.33%	-11.96%	+4.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.70%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.20%	-0.20%	-5.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.99%	-8.25%	+4.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.73%	3.11%	-0.38%

Volatility

PIPE vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) has a higher volatility of 6.11% compared to Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) at 4.48%. This indicates that PIPE'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.

Volatility by Period

	PIPE	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.11%	4.48%	+1.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.19%	12.05%	-0.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.39%	15.91%	-1.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.77%	22.24%	-3.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.77%	22.12%	-3.35%

PIPE vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PIPE has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

PIPE vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

PIPE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.73%, more than QQQM's 0.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	3.73%	3.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.41%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PIPE and QQQM in my portfolio?

PIPE and QQQM have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PIPE or QQQM?

PIPE has higher volatility (6.11%) compared to QQQM (4.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PIPE dropped -15.69% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, PIPE or QQQM?

On 1-year performance, QQQM leads with 41.98% vs 27.43% for PIPE. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, PIPE or QQQM?

Over the 1-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 41.98% return vs 27.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PIPE or QQQM?

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PIPE.

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

PIPE has the higher dividend yield at 3.73%, compared with 0.41% for QQQM.

What is the main difference between PIPE and QQQM?

PIPE is categorized as Energy Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PIPE and 0.15% for QQQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.92), 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.