QQH vs. PPA

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

QQH (HCM Defender 100 Index ETF) and PPA (Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQH is a Technology Equities fund tracking the HCM Defender 100 Index, while PPA is a Aerospace & Defense fund tracking the SPADE Defense Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QQH returned 13.32%/yr vs 18.41%/yr for PPA. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QQH charges 1.14%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for PPA.

Performance

QQH vs. PPA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HCM Defender 100 Index ETF (QQH) and Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF (PPA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQH achieves a 8.65% return, which is significantly lower than PPA's 11.20% return.

QQH

• 1D: 0.72%
• 1M: -0.74%
• YTD: 8.65%
• 6M: 8.98%
• 1Y: 30.75%
• 3Y*: 22.44%
• 5Y*: 13.32%
• 10Y*: —

PPA

• 1D: -1.24%
• 1M: 2.73%
• YTD: 11.20%
• 6M: 13.03%
• 1Y: 28.73%
• 3Y*: 28.86%
• 5Y*: 18.41%
• 10Y*: 17.72%

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

QQH vs. PPA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
QQH HCM Defender 100 Index ETF	8.65%	15.66%	33.64%	48.05%	-39.60%	37.52%	41.71%	15.09%
PPA Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF	11.20%	37.15%	25.28%	18.41%	9.52%	7.09%	0.45%	3.71%

Correlation

The correlation between QQH and PPA is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2019	0.46

The correlation between QQH and PPA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQH vs. PPA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQH	PPA
Technology	56.6%	9.3%
Communication Services	14.9%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	13.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	6.3%	-
Healthcare	3.5%	-
Industrials	2.2%	90.6%
Utilities	1.2%	-
Basic Materials	1.0%	-
Energy	0.5%	-
Financial Services	0.2%	0.0%
Real Estate	0.0%	-

Return for Risk

QQH vs. PPA — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQH

QQH Risk / Return Rank: 42
QQH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
QQH Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
QQH Omega Ratio Rank: 43
QQH Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
QQH Martin Ratio Rank: 37

PPA

PPA Risk / Return Rank: 46
PPA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
PPA Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
PPA Omega Ratio Rank: 43
PPA Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
PPA Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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. PPA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HCM Defender 100 Index ETF (QQH) and Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF (PPA). 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.

	QQH	PPA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.39	1.44	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	2.14	-0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.25	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.91	2.11	-0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.10	5.94	-0.84

QQH vs. PPA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQH Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is comparable to the PPA Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQH and PPA, 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

QQH vs. PPA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQH drawdown since its inception was -41.87%, smaller than the maximum PPA drawdown of -57.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQH and PPA.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQH	PPA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.87%	-57.37%	+15.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.18%	-13.71%	-2.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.84%	-15.24%	-9.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.87%	-18.37%	-23.50%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-43.92%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.87%	-6.15%	+0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.90%	-9.18%	-3.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.04%	4.85%	+1.19%

Volatility

QQH vs. PPA - Volatility Comparison

HCM Defender 100 Index ETF (QQH) has a higher volatility of 9.85% compared to Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF (PPA) at 8.91%. This indicates that QQH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PPA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QQH	PPA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.85%	8.91%	+0.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.84%	17.06%	-0.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.17%	20.04%	+2.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.81%	18.70%	+3.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.89%	20.73%	+4.16%

QQH vs. PPA - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQH has a 1.14% expense ratio, which is higher than PPA's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQH vs. PPA - Dividend Comparison

QQH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.19%, less than PPA's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PPA Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF	0.38%	0.42%	0.61%	0.67%	0.83%	0.59%	0.88%	0.95%	0.90%	0.67%	1.70%	1.41%
QQH HCM Defender 100 Index ETF	0.19%	0.21%	0.24%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.21%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQH and PPA in my portfolio?

QQH and PPA have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQH or PPA?

QQH has higher volatility (9.85%) compared to PPA (8.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQH dropped -41.87% vs PPA's -57.37%.

Which ETF is better, QQH or PPA?

On 5-year performance, PPA leads with 18.41% vs 13.32% for QQH. On fees, PPA is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, PPA has been the lower-risk option at 8.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QQH or PPA?

Over the 5-year period, PPA has performed better with a 18.41% return vs 13.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQH or PPA?

PPA is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 1.14% for QQH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QQH or PPA?

PPA has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.19% for QQH.

What is the main difference between QQH and PPA?

QQH is categorized as Technology Equities, while PPA is Aerospace & Defense. QQH tracks HCM Defender 100 Index, while PPA tracks SPADE Defense Index. They also come from different issuers: Howard Capital Management and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 1.14% for QQH and 0.58% for PPA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 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.