QQQM vs. FAS

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) and FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while FAS is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QQQM returned 16.94%/yr vs 7.30%/yr for FAS. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QQQM charges 0.15%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for FAS.

Performance

QQQM vs. FAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) and Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQQM achieves a 17.59% return, which is significantly higher than FAS's -13.50% return.

QQQM

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: 0.22%
• YTD: 17.59%
• 6M: 17.91%
• 1Y: 37.64%
• 3Y*: 26.52%
• 5Y*: 16.94%
• 10Y*: —

FAS

• 1D: 4.15%
• 1M: 10.95%
• YTD: -13.50%
• 6M: -13.89%
• 1Y: 7.93%
• 3Y*: 38.21%
• 5Y*: 7.30%
• 10Y*: 21.20%

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

QQQM vs. FAS - 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%
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares	-13.50%	21.48%	84.47%	14.92%	-43.19%	116.59%	50.15%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQM and FAS is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2020	0.51

The correlation between QQQM and FAS shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (1 year) to 0.56 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QQQM vs. FAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQQM	FAS
Technology	53.8%	1.7%
Communication Services	15.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	-
Healthcare	4.2%	-
Industrials	2.8%	0.2%
Utilities	1.4%	-
Basic Materials	1.1%	-
Energy	0.6%	-
Financial Services	0.2%	98.0%
Real Estate	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

QQQM vs. FAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 72
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 73
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 70

FAS

FAS Risk / Return Rank: 11
FAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
FAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
FAS Omega Ratio Rank: 12
FAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
FAS Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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.

QQQM vs. FAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) and Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS). 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	FAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	0.03	+2.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.74	0.34	+2.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.04	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.02	0.03	+2.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.23	0.08	+11.16

QQQM vs. FAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQM Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is higher than the FAS Sharpe Ratio of 0.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQM and FAS, 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

QQQM vs. FAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQM drawdown since its inception was -35.04%, smaller than the maximum FAS drawdown of -91.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQM and FAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQM	FAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.04%	-91.61%	+56.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.96%	-40.88%	+28.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.70%	-43.10%	+20.40%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.04%	-66.88%	+31.84%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-85.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.33%	-20.63%	+17.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.23%	-31.12%	+22.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.21%	17.97%	-14.76%

Volatility

QQQM vs. FAS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) is 7.45%, while Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) has a volatility of 12.45%. This indicates that QQQM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QQQM	FAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.45%	12.45%	-5.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.71%	33.46%	-19.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.11%	43.61%	-26.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.40%	55.59%	-33.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.22%	61.33%	-39.11%

QQQM vs. FAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQM has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FAS's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQM vs. FAS - Dividend Comparison

QQQM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.43%, less than FAS's 9.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares	9.64%	8.21%	0.76%	1.77%	0.91%	0.60%	0.47%	0.62%	1.43%	0.11%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.43%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQM and FAS in my portfolio?

QQQM and FAS have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQQM or FAS?

FAS has higher volatility (12.45%) compared to QQQM (7.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQM dropped -35.04% vs FAS's -91.61%.

Which ETF is better, QQQM or FAS?

On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 16.94% vs 7.30% for FAS. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, QQQM or FAS?

Over the 5-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 16.94% return vs 7.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQM or FAS?

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for FAS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QQQM or FAS?

FAS has the higher dividend yield at 9.64%, compared with 0.43% for QQQM.

What is the main difference between QQQM and FAS?

QQQM is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FAS is Leveraged Equities. QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while FAS tracks Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QQQM and 1.00% for FAS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 0.03), 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.