PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QMOM vs. PTF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QMOM vs. PTF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) and Invesco DWA Technology Momentum ETF (PTF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMOM achieves a 25.11% return, which is significantly lower than PTF's 77.10% return. Over the past 10 years, QMOM has underperformed PTF with an annualized return of 13.86%, while PTF has yielded a comparatively higher 26.90% annualized return.


QMOM

1D
1.78%
1M
6.76%
YTD
25.11%
6M
27.55%
1Y
32.33%
3Y*
23.37%
5Y*
11.72%
10Y*
13.86%

PTF

1D
3.82%
1M
18.91%
YTD
77.10%
6M
76.93%
1Y
109.42%
3Y*
43.15%
5Y*
24.41%
10Y*
26.90%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QMOM vs. PTF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QMOM
Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF
25.11%2.36%30.43%9.50%-6.99%-4.06%61.94%28.39%-11.75%15.92%
PTF
Invesco DWA Technology Momentum ETF
77.10%5.68%43.65%33.73%-31.75%18.10%82.06%46.71%0.01%32.07%

Correlation

The correlation between QMOM and PTF is 0.81, 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

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.80

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2016

0.77

The correlation between QMOM and PTF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

QMOM vs. PTF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QMOM
PTF

Industrials

37.5%
1.8%

Technology

23.9%
92.9%

Basic Materials

9.0%

-

Healthcare

8.9%

-

Consumer Cyclical

7.4%

-

Energy

5.5%
1.6%

Communication Services

4.2%
5.8%

Utilities

2.0%

-

Financial Services

1.9%
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.6%

-

Real Estate

-

-

Industrials

QMOM
37.5%
PTF
1.8%

Technology

QMOM
23.9%
PTF
92.9%

Basic Materials

QMOM
9.0%
PTF

-

Healthcare

QMOM
8.9%
PTF

-

Consumer Cyclical

QMOM
7.4%
PTF

-

Energy

QMOM
5.5%
PTF
1.6%

Communication Services

QMOM
4.2%
PTF
5.8%

Utilities

QMOM
2.0%
PTF

-

Financial Services

QMOM
1.9%
PTF
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

QMOM
1.6%
PTF

-

Real Estate

QMOM

-

PTF

-

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

QMOM vs. PTF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMOM
QMOM Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
QMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
QMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank

PTF
PTF Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
PTF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PTF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
PTF Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
PTF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
PTF Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QMOM vs. PTF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) and Invesco DWA Technology Momentum ETF (PTF). 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.


QMOMPTFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.39

2.87

-1.47

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.95

3.16

-1.21

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.44

-0.18

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

6.22

-3.59

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.61

24.81

-15.19

QMOM vs. PTF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMOM Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is lower than the PTF Sharpe Ratio of 2.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMOM and PTF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QMOMPTFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.39

2.87

-1.47

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

0.70

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.82

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.53

-0.02

Drawdowns

QMOM vs. PTF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMOM drawdown since its inception was -39.13%, smaller than the maximum PTF drawdown of -55.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMOM and PTF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QMOMPTFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.13%

-55.38%

+16.25%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.65%

-17.99%

+5.34%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.46%

-36.11%

+9.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.82%

-44.88%

+18.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.13%

-44.88%

+5.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.92%

-13.28%

+0.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.45%

4.51%

-1.06%

Volatility

QMOM vs. PTF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) is 8.29%, while Invesco DWA Technology Momentum ETF (PTF) has a volatility of 13.27%. This indicates that QMOM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PTF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QMOMPTFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.29%

13.27%

-4.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.87%

29.64%

-9.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.30%

38.40%

-15.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.20%

34.96%

-10.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.49%

32.95%

-6.46%

QMOM vs. PTF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QMOM has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than PTF's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

QMOM vs. PTF - Dividend Comparison

QMOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.43%, more than PTF's 0.01% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
PTF
Invesco DWA Technology Momentum ETF
0.01%0.21%0.00%0.07%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.08%0.04%0.26%
QMOM
Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF
0.43%0.54%1.40%0.87%1.59%0.12%0.08%0.01%0.05%0.13%0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions


QMOM and PTF have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PTF has higher volatility (13.27%) compared to QMOM (8.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMOM dropped -39.13% vs PTF's -55.38%.

On 10-year performance, PTF leads with 26.90% vs 13.86% for QMOM. On fees, QMOM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QMOM has been the lower-risk option at 8.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, PTF has performed better with a 26.90% return vs 13.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QMOM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PTF.

QMOM has the higher dividend yield at 0.43%, compared with 0.01% for PTF.

They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for QMOM and 0.60% for PTF.

PTF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 1.39), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QMOM and PTF

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