QQH vs. ASMH

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about HCM Defender 100 Index ETF (QQH) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH).

QQH and ASMH are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. QQH is a passively managed fund by Howard Capital Management that tracks the performance of the HCM Defender 100 Index. It was launched on Oct 10, 2019. ASMH is a passively managed fund by Precidian Funds that tracks the performance of the ASML Holding NV Sponsored ADR. It was launched on Mar 13, 2025. Both QQH and ASMH are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

QQH vs. ASMH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HCM Defender 100 Index ETF (QQH) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

QQH vs. ASMH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QQH HCM Defender 100 Index ETF	-9.74%	40.37%
ASMH ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF	25.77%	58.84%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQH achieves a -9.74% return, which is significantly lower than ASMH's 25.77% return.

QQH

• 1D: 1.53%
• 1M: -6.67%
• YTD: -9.74%
• 6M: -8.31%
• 1Y: 19.66%
• 3Y*: 21.34%
• 5Y*: 10.55%
• 10Y*: —

ASMH

• 1D: 4.15%
• 1M: -6.47%
• YTD: 25.77%
• 6M: 39.55%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QQH vs. ASMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQH has a 1.14% expense ratio, which is higher than ASMH's 0.19% expense ratio.

QQH

HCM Defender 100 Index ETF

ASMH

ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF

Return for Risk

QQH vs. ASMH — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQH

QQH Risk / Return Rank: 47
QQH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
QQH Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
QQH Omega Ratio Rank: 44
QQH Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
QQH Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

QQH vs. ASMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HCM Defender 100 Index ETF (QQH) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). 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.

	QQH	ASMH	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.88	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.30	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.25	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.73	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QQH	ASMH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	3.00	-2.30

Correlation

The correlation between QQH and ASMH is 0.63, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

QQH vs. ASMH - Dividend Comparison

QQH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, less than ASMH's 1.29% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
QQH HCM Defender 100 Index ETF	0.23%	0.21%	0.24%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.21%
ASMH ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF	1.29%	0.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

QQH vs. ASMH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQH drawdown since its inception was -41.87%, which is greater than ASMH's maximum drawdown of -15.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQH and ASMH.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQH	ASMH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.87%	-15.89%	-25.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.18%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.87%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.90%	-11.21%	-3.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.14%	-4.43%	-8.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.41%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QQH	ASMH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.43%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.70%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.37%	36.81%	-14.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.68%	36.81%	-15.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.87%	36.81%	-11.94%