RFV vs. QQQM
RFV (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFV is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RFV returned 10.00%/yr vs 18.07%/yr for QQQM. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RFV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.
Performance
RFV vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFV achieves a 13.04% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 21.39% return.
RFV
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 3.75%
- YTD
- 13.04%
- 6M
- 10.71%
- 1Y
- 25.06%
- 3Y*
- 16.77%
- 5Y*
- 10.00%
- 10Y*
- 12.53%
QQQM
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 10.67%
- YTD
- 21.39%
- 6M
- 19.75%
- 1Y
- 41.98%
- 3Y*
- 28.89%
- 5Y*
- 18.07%
- 10Y*
- —
RFV vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF | 13.04% | 7.66% | 5.63% | 30.26% | -3.99% | 33.02% | 23.54% |
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 21.39% | 20.85% | 25.68% | 55.01% | -32.52% | 27.45% | 6.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFV and QQQM is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2020 | 0.55 |
The correlation between RFV and QQQM shifts across timeframes, from 0.44 (1 year) to 0.59 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
RFV vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RFV
QQQM
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Energy
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Healthcare
Communication Services
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
RFV
QQQM
Financial Services
RFV
QQQM
Energy
RFV
QQQM
Technology
RFV
QQQM
Industrials
RFV
QQQM
Consumer Defensive
RFV
QQQM
Basic Materials
RFV
QQQM
Real Estate
RFV
QQQM
Healthcare
RFV
QQQM
Communication Services
RFV
-
QQQM
Utilities
RFV
-
QQQM
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
RFV vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank
RFV
QQQM
RFV vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) 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.
| RFV | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.45 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.01 | 3.53 | -1.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.94 | 13.52 | -7.58 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RFV | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.39 | 2.65 | -1.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 | 0.82 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.50 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.38 | 0.85 | -0.47 |
Drawdowns
RFV vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than QQQM's maximum drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and QQQM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFV | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -71.82% | -35.04% | -36.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.51% | -11.96% | -0.55% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.65% | -22.70% | -1.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.65% | -35.04% | +10.39% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -52.24% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.36% | -0.20% | -0.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.79% | -8.25% | -1.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.23% | 3.11% | +1.12% |
Volatility
RFV vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) have volatilities of 4.60% and 4.48%, 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
| RFV | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.60% | 4.48% | +0.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.86% | 12.05% | -0.19% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.13% | 15.91% | +2.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.08% | 22.24% | -0.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.99% | 22.12% | +2.87% |
RFV vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFV vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison
RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, more than QQQM's 0.41% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 0.41% | 0.50% | 0.61% | 0.65% | 0.83% | 0.40% | 0.16% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF | 1.84% | 2.07% | 1.31% | 1.27% | 2.05% | 1.60% | 1.52% | 1.71% | 1.39% | 1.36% | 0.88% | 1.79% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFV and QQQM have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RFV has higher volatility (4.60%) compared to QQQM (4.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs QQQM's -35.04%.
On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 18.07% vs 10.00% for RFV. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QQQM has been the lower-risk option at 4.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 18.07% return vs 10.00%. 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 0.35% for RFV.
RFV has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 0.41% for QQQM.
RFV is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. RFV tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFV and 0.15% for QQQM.
QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.39), 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 RFV and QQQM
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