QQQM vs. AAAU
QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) and AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while AAAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QQQM returned 16.94%/yr vs 17.33%/yr for AAAU. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QQQM charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for AAAU.
Performance
QQQM vs. AAAU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QQQM achieves a 17.59% return, which is significantly higher than AAAU's -2.40% return.
QQQM
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- 1.75%
- YTD
- 17.59%
- 6M
- 17.91%
- 1Y
- 37.64%
- 3Y*
- 26.52%
- 5Y*
- 16.94%
- 10Y*
- —
AAAU
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- -7.36%
- YTD
- -2.40%
- 6M
- -2.14%
- 1Y
- 22.47%
- 3Y*
- 29.19%
- 5Y*
- 17.33%
- 10Y*
- —
QQQM vs. AAAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 17.59% | 20.85% | 25.68% | 55.01% | -32.52% | 27.45% | 6.64% |
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | -2.40% | 64.06% | 26.91% | 12.96% | -0.50% | -4.01% | -1.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between QQQM and AAAU is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2020 | 0.12 |
The correlation between QQQM and AAAU shifts across timeframes, from 0.10 (5 years) to 0.22 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
QQQM vs. AAAU — Risk / Return Rank
QQQM
AAAU
QQQM vs. AAAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU). 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.
| QQQM | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.19 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.02 | 0.99 | +2.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.23 | 2.86 | +8.37 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QQQM vs. AAAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QQQM drawdown since its inception was -35.04%, which is greater than AAAU's maximum drawdown of -24.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQM and AAAU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QQQM | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.04% | -24.38% | -10.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.96% | -24.38% | +12.42% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.70% | -24.38% | +1.68% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.04% | -24.38% | -10.66% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.33% | -21.95% | +18.62% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.23% | -6.23% | -2.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.21% | 8.44% | -5.23% |
Volatility
QQQM vs. AAAU - Volatility Comparison
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) have volatilities of 7.45% and 7.77%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QQQM | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.45% | 7.77% | -0.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.71% | 23.88% | -10.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.11% | 27.10% | -9.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.40% | 18.06% | +4.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.22% | 17.13% | +5.09% |
QQQM vs. AAAU - Expense Ratio Comparison
QQQM has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than AAAU's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
QQQM vs. AAAU - Dividend Comparison
QQQM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.43%, while AAAU has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 0.43% | 0.50% | 0.61% | 0.65% | 0.83% | 0.40% | 0.16% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QQQM and AAAU have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AAAU has higher volatility (7.77%) compared to QQQM (7.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQM dropped -35.04% vs AAAU's -24.38%.
On 5-year performance, AAAU leads with 17.33% vs 16.94% for QQQM. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QQQM has been the lower-risk option at 7.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, AAAU has performed better with a 17.33% return vs 16.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for AAAU.
QQQM has the higher dividend yield at 0.43%, compared with 0.00% for AAAU.
QQQM is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while AAAU is Gold. QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while AAAU tracks LBMA Gold PM Price. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QQQM and 0.18% for AAAU.
QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 0.89), 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.
Find the right allocation for QQQM and AAAU
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