QVMS vs. QQQM

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

QVMS (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVMS is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QVMS returned 8.93%/yr vs 15.60%/yr for QQQM. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

QVMS vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QVMS achieves a 22.09% return, which is significantly higher than QQQM's 17.45% return.

QVMS

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 1.20%
• 6M: 16.26%
• YTD: 22.09%
• 1Y: 30.57%
• 3Y*: 15.10%
• 5Y*: 8.93%
• 10Y*: —

QQQM

• 1D: 1.11%
• 1M: -0.12%
• 6M: 15.21%
• YTD: 17.45%
• 1Y: 30.08%
• 3Y*: 24.62%
• 5Y*: 15.60%
• 10Y*: —

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

QVMS vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF	22.09%	5.56%	9.50%	16.89%	-14.61%	4.82%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	17.45%	20.85%	25.68%	55.01%	-32.52%	12.36%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMS and QQQM is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2021	0.65

The correlation between QVMS and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

QVMS vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QVMS	QQQM
Financial Services	18.0%	0.2%
Technology	16.7%	58.7%
Industrials	16.3%	2.6%
Consumer Cyclical	13.4%	11.4%
Healthcare	11.1%	3.7%
Real Estate	7.1%	0.1%
Energy	5.6%	0.5%
Basic Materials	5.0%	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	6.4%
Utilities	2.1%	1.2%
Communication Services	1.9%	14.3%

Return for Risk

QVMS vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QVMS

QVMS Risk / Return Rank: 72
QVMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
QVMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
QVMS Omega Ratio Rank: 62
QVMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
QVMS Martin Ratio Rank: 79

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 61
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

QVMS vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). 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.

	QVMS	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	1.64	+0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.59	2.20	+0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.29	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.50	2.53	+0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.82	9.02	+2.80

QVMS vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMS and QQQM, 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

QVMS vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QVMS	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.05%	-35.04%	+6.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.78%	-11.96%	+3.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.05%	-22.70%	-5.35%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.05%	-35.04%	+6.99%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.33%	-3.44%	+1.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.92%	-8.15%	-0.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.60%	3.34%	-0.74%

Volatility

QVMS vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) is 4.13%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 7.95%. This indicates that QVMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QVMS	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.13%	7.95%	-3.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.39%	15.24%	-2.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.70%	18.46%	-0.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.15%	22.65%	-1.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.15%	22.31%	-1.16%

QVMS vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QVMS and QQQM have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

QVMS vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, more than QQQM's 0.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.44%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF	1.15%	1.10%	1.53%	1.51%	1.58%	0.64%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QVMS and QQQM in my portfolio?

QVMS and QQQM have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QVMS or QQQM?

QQQM has higher volatility (7.95%) compared to QVMS (4.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, QVMS or QQQM?

On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 15.60% vs 8.93% for QVMS. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, QVMS has been the lower-risk option at 4.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QVMS or QQQM?

Over the 5-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 15.60% return vs 8.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QVMS or QQQM?

QVMS and QQQM have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

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

QVMS has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.44% for QQQM.

What is the main difference between QVMS and QQQM?

QVMS is categorized as Multi-factor, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.64), 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.