RZG vs. QQQM
RZG (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RZG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RZG returned 4.85%/yr vs 18.07%/yr for QQQM. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RZG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.
Performance
RZG vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RZG achieves a 18.15% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 21.39% return.
RZG
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- -0.10%
- YTD
- 18.15%
- 6M
- 16.98%
- 1Y
- 30.70%
- 3Y*
- 17.12%
- 5Y*
- 4.85%
- 10Y*
- 9.65%
QQQM
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 10.67%
- YTD
- 21.39%
- 6M
- 19.75%
- 1Y
- 41.98%
- 3Y*
- 28.89%
- 5Y*
- 18.07%
- 10Y*
- —
RZG vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RZG Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF | 18.15% | 10.22% | 9.84% | 19.15% | -29.00% | 21.01% | 19.81% |
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | 21.39% | 20.85% | 25.68% | 55.01% | -32.52% | 27.45% | 6.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between RZG and QQQM is 0.64, 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 | 0.64 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2020 | 0.68 |
The correlation between RZG and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.
RZG vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RZG
QQQM
Healthcare
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Utilities
Healthcare
RZG
QQQM
Industrials
RZG
QQQM
Technology
RZG
QQQM
Financial Services
RZG
QQQM
Consumer Cyclical
RZG
QQQM
Real Estate
RZG
QQQM
Consumer Defensive
RZG
QQQM
Energy
RZG
QQQM
Communication Services
RZG
QQQM
Basic Materials
RZG
QQQM
Utilities
RZG
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
RZG vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank
RZG
QQQM
RZG vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) 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.
| RZG | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.99 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.98 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.45 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.58 | 3.53 | +0.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.94 | 13.52 | -1.58 |
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
| RZG | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.66 | 2.65 | -0.99 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 | 0.82 | -0.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.39 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.37 | 0.85 | -0.47 |
Drawdowns
RZG vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RZG drawdown since its inception was -58.52%, which is greater than QQQM's maximum drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RZG and QQQM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RZG | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.52% | -35.04% | -23.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.63% | -11.96% | +3.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.73% | -22.70% | -3.03% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.33% | -35.04% | -3.29% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -54.02% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.92% | -0.20% | -1.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.13% | -8.25% | -3.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.58% | 3.11% | -0.53% |
Volatility
RZG vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) have volatilities of 4.68% 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
| RZG | QQQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.68% | 4.48% | +0.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.57% | 12.05% | +1.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.57% | 15.91% | +2.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.97% | 22.24% | +0.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.64% | 22.12% | +2.52% |
RZG vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison
RZG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
RZG vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison
RZG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, 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% |
RZG Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF | 0.42% | 0.37% | 0.95% | 1.43% | 1.59% | 0.22% | 0.49% | 0.70% | 0.46% | 0.44% | 0.65% | 0.70% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RZG and QQQM have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RZG has higher volatility (4.68%) compared to QQQM (4.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RZG dropped -58.52% vs QQQM's -35.04%.
On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 18.07% vs 4.85% for RZG. 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 4.85%. 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 RZG.
RZG and QQQM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.42%.
RZG is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RZG and 0.15% for QQQM.
QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.66), 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 RZG 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