QQQG vs. SMH

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

QQQG (Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQQG is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Pacer, while SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. QQQG is actively managed, while SMH is passively managed. Over the past year, QQQG returned 32.63% vs 92.69% for SMH. Their correlation of 0.84 means they have usually moved in the same direction. QQQG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMH.

Performance

QQQG vs. SMH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (QQQG) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQQG achieves a 24.40% return, which is significantly lower than SMH's 51.46% return.

QQQG

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: -3.10%
• 6M: 23.92%
• YTD: 24.40%
• 1Y: 32.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.01%

SMH

• 1D: 0.91%
• 1M: -7.91%
• 6M: 33.70%
• YTD: 51.46%
• 1Y: 92.69%
• 3Y*: 53.04%
• 5Y*: 32.99%
• 10Y*: 33.99%
• ALL TIME*: 11.09%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QQQG Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	$320.75K	$389.13K	$482.99K
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	$8.29B	$7.23B	$7.12B

QQQG vs. SMH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QQQG Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	24.40%	14.72%	1.68%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	51.46%	49.17%	-3.22%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQG and SMH is 0.87, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2024	0.84

The correlation between QQQG and SMH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQQG vs. SMH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQQG	SMH
Technology	76.3%	100.0%
Healthcare	9.7%	-
Communication Services	4.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	-
Energy	2.0%	-
Industrials	2.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

QQQG vs. SMH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QQQG

QQQG Risk / Return Rank: 56
QQQG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
QQQG Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
QQQG Omega Ratio Rank: 51
QQQG Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
QQQG Martin Ratio Rank: 57

SMH

SMH Risk / Return Rank: 88
SMH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
SMH Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
SMH Omega Ratio Rank: 85
SMH Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
SMH Martin Ratio Rank: 91

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QQQG vs. SMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (QQQG) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). 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.

	QQQG	SMH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.34	2.43	-1.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.87	2.80	-0.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.37	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	3.79	-1.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.07	15.18	-8.11

QQQG vs. SMH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQG Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is lower than the SMH Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQG and SMH, 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

QQQG vs. SMH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQG drawdown since its inception was -23.61%, smaller than the maximum SMH drawdown of -84.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQG and SMH.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQG	SMH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.61%	-84.96%	+61.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.79%	-24.62%	+10.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-35.74%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-45.30%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.12%	-18.46%	+9.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.76%	-40.89%	+37.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.63%	6.13%	-1.50%

Volatility

QQQG vs. SMH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (QQQG) is 8.81%, while VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a volatility of 14.15%. This indicates that QQQG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QQQG	SMH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.81%	14.15%	-5.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.12%	32.94%	-11.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.47%	38.50%	-14.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.99%	36.51%	-11.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.99%	33.33%	-8.34%

QQQG vs. SMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than SMH's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQG vs. SMH - Dividend Comparison

QQQG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.05%, less than SMH's 0.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QQQG Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.05%	0.06%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	0.20%	0.31%	0.44%	0.60%	1.18%	0.51%	0.69%	1.50%	1.88%	1.43%	0.80%	2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQG and SMH in my portfolio?

QQQG and SMH have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQQG or SMH?

SMH has higher volatility (14.15%) compared to QQQG (8.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQG dropped -23.61% vs SMH's -84.96%.

Which ETF is better, QQQG or SMH?

On 1-year performance, SMH leads with 92.69% vs 32.63% for QQQG. On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, QQQG has been the lower-risk option at 8.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QQQG or SMH?

Over the 1-year period, SMH has performed better with a 92.69% return vs 32.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQG or SMH?

SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for QQQG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QQQG or SMH?

SMH has the higher dividend yield at 0.20%, compared with 0.05% for QQQG.

What is the main difference between QQQG and SMH?

QQQG is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while SMH is Semiconductors. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for QQQG and 0.35% for SMH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 1.34), 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.