QQQH vs. QQQG

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

QQQH (NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF) and QQQG (Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QQQH returned 13.37% vs 34.56% for QQQG. Their correlation of 0.88 means they have usually moved in the same direction. QQQH charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for QQQG.

Performance

QQQH vs. QQQG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQQH achieves a 6.32% return, which is significantly lower than QQQG's 28.97% return.

QQQH

• 1D: 1.44%
• 1M: 0.44%
• 6M: 6.29%
• YTD: 6.32%
• 1Y: 13.37%
• 3Y*: 18.06%
• 5Y*: 7.57%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.98%

QQQG

• 1D: 3.68%
• 1M: 0.46%
• 6M: 32.20%
• YTD: 28.97%
• 1Y: 34.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 23.24%

*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	$354.95K	$397.77K	$489.74K
QQQH NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF	$1.75M	$1.56M	$1.79M

QQQH vs. QQQG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QQQH NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF	6.32%	14.17%	7.25%
QQQG Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	28.97%	14.72%	1.68%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQH and QQQG is 0.90, 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.	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2024	0.88

The correlation between QQQH and QQQG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQQH vs. QQQG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQQH	QQQG
Technology	57.9%	76.3%
Communication Services	11.8%	4.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	3.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.4%	2.1%
Industrials	4.0%	2.0%
Healthcare	3.6%	9.7%
Utilities	1.2%	-
Basic Materials	1.0%	-
Energy	0.5%	2.0%
Financial Services	0.2%	-
Real Estate	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

QQQH vs. QQQG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQQH

QQQH Risk / Return Rank: 45
QQQH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
QQQH Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
QQQH Omega Ratio Rank: 40
QQQH Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
QQQH Martin Ratio Rank: 54

QQQG

QQQG Risk / Return Rank: 53
QQQG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
QQQG Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
QQQG Omega Ratio Rank: 48
QQQG Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QQQG Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

QQQH vs. QQQG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF (QQQH) and Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (QQQG). 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.

	QQQH	QQQG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.17	1.41	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.65	1.96	-0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.25	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.93	2.52	-0.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.08	7.47	-0.39

QQQH vs. QQQG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQH Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is comparable to the QQQG Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQH and QQQG, 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

QQQH vs. QQQG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQH drawdown since its inception was -31.24%, which is greater than QQQG's maximum drawdown of -23.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQH and QQQG.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQH	QQQG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.24%	-23.61%	-7.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.96%	-13.79%	+6.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.18%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.49%	-5.78%	+4.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.11%	-3.76%	-4.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.89%	4.64%	-2.75%

Volatility

QQQH vs. QQQG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF (QQQH) is 4.21%, while Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (QQQG) has a volatility of 9.43%. This indicates that QQQH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QQQH	QQQG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.21%	9.43%	-5.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.39%	21.40%	-12.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.50%	24.67%	-13.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.47%	25.10%	-11.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.47%	25.10%	-11.63%

QQQH vs. QQQG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQH has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQG's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQH vs. QQQG - Dividend Comparison

QQQH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.97%, more than QQQG's 0.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
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%
QQQH NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF	8.97%	8.86%	7.53%	7.18%	9.05%	7.77%	7.48%	0.65%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQH and QQQG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, QQQH and QQQG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, QQQH or QQQG?

QQQG has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to QQQH (4.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQH dropped -31.24% vs QQQG's -23.61%.

Which ETF is better, QQQH or QQQG?

On 1-year performance, QQQG leads with 34.56% vs 13.37% for QQQH. On fees, QQQG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, QQQH has been the lower-risk option at 4.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QQQH or QQQG?

Over the 1-year period, QQQG has performed better with a 34.56% return vs 13.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQH or QQQG?

QQQG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for QQQH.

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

QQQH has the higher dividend yield at 8.97%, compared with 0.05% for QQQG.

What is the main difference between QQQH and QQQG?

They also come from different issuers: Neos and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for QQQH and 0.49% for QQQG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 1.17), 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.