QQWZ vs. IMOM

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

QQWZ (Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF) and IMOM (Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQWZ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Pacer, while IMOM is a Momentum fund tracking the Alpha Architect Intern.Quan. Mome. (USD)(TR). QQWZ is actively managed, while IMOM is passively managed. Over the past year, QQWZ returned 33.73% vs 39.37% for IMOM. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QQWZ charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for IMOM.

Performance

QQWZ vs. IMOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ) and Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF (IMOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQWZ achieves a 15.29% return, which is significantly lower than IMOM's 16.29% return.

QQWZ

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 1.78%
• YTD: 15.29%
• 6M: 14.62%
• 1Y: 33.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IMOM

• 1D: 1.30%
• 1M: -0.87%
• YTD: 16.29%
• 6M: 18.55%
• 1Y: 39.37%
• 3Y*: 23.40%
• 5Y*: 8.18%
• 10Y*: 7.94%

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

QQWZ vs. IMOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF	15.29%	26.23%
IMOM Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF	16.29%	27.68%

Correlation

The correlation between QQWZ and IMOM is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2025	0.47

The correlation between QQWZ and IMOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QQWZ vs. IMOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQWZ

QQWZ Risk / Return Rank: 78
QQWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
QQWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QQWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 75
QQWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
QQWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 81

IMOM

IMOM Risk / Return Rank: 65
IMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
IMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
IMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 69
IMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
IMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

QQWZ vs. IMOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ) and Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF (IMOM). 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.

	QQWZ	IMOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.13	1.92	+0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	2.60	+0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.35	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.09	2.52	+1.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.21	10.23	+3.98

QQWZ vs. IMOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQWZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is comparable to the IMOM Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQWZ and IMOM, 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

QQWZ vs. IMOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQWZ drawdown since its inception was -7.81%, smaller than the maximum IMOM drawdown of -45.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQWZ and IMOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQWZ	IMOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.81%	-45.74%	+37.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.81%	-15.61%	+7.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.51%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-39.27%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.74%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.29%	-3.90%	+0.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.43%	-14.15%	+12.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.24%	3.84%	-1.60%

Volatility

QQWZ vs. IMOM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ) is 7.06%, while Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF (IMOM) has a volatility of 8.31%. This indicates that QQWZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QQWZ	IMOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.06%	8.31%	-1.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.75%	17.95%	-7.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.96%	20.49%	-5.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.18%	20.04%	-4.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.18%	20.30%	-5.12%

QQWZ vs. IMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQWZ has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than IMOM's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQWZ vs. IMOM - Dividend Comparison

QQWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%, less than IMOM's 2.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
IMOM Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF	2.17%	2.53%	4.52%	2.95%	6.06%	1.27%	0.59%	1.17%	0.78%	1.11%	0.54%
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF	0.56%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQWZ and IMOM in my portfolio?

QQWZ and IMOM have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQWZ or IMOM?

IMOM has higher volatility (8.31%) compared to QQWZ (7.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQWZ dropped -7.81% vs IMOM's -45.74%.

Which ETF is better, QQWZ or IMOM?

On 1-year performance, IMOM leads with 39.37% vs 33.73% for QQWZ. On fees, IMOM is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, QQWZ has been the lower-risk option at 7.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QQWZ or IMOM?

Over the 1-year period, IMOM has performed better with a 39.37% return vs 33.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQWZ or IMOM?

IMOM is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for QQWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QQWZ or IMOM?

IMOM has the higher dividend yield at 2.17%, compared with 0.56% for QQWZ.

What is the main difference between QQWZ and IMOM?

QQWZ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while IMOM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for QQWZ and 0.38% for IMOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 1.92), 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.