TMFM vs. QQQJ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

TMFM (Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and QQQJ (Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. TMFM is actively managed, while QQQJ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFM returned 1.83%/yr vs 19.03%/yr for QQQJ. Their correlation of 0.80 means they have usually moved in the same direction. TMFM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQJ.

Performance

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) and Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQQJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMFM achieves a -5.79% return, which is significantly lower than QQQJ's 19.53% return.

TMFM

• 1D: 0.43%
• 1M: -1.09%
• 6M: -2.45%
• YTD: -5.79%
• 1Y: -14.17%
• 3Y*: 1.83%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -2.04%

QQQJ

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: -3.19%
• 6M: 15.30%
• YTD: 19.53%
• 1Y: 34.13%
• 3Y*: 19.03%
• 5Y*: 6.23%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.75%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QQQJ Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF	$4.82M	$6.21M	$6.07M
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF	$157.21K	$169.51K	$230.30K

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF	-5.79%	-8.98%	17.54%	21.81%	-27.36%	1.91%
QQQJ Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF	19.53%	20.44%	15.36%	13.68%	-28.25%	1.33%

Correlation

The correlation between TMFM and QQQJ is 0.52, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.52
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2021	0.80

Over the past year, the correlation between TMFM and QQQJ has dropped to 0.52 - well below their long-term average of 0.80, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMFM	QQQJ
Technology	29.7%	34.2%
Healthcare	24.5%	23.3%
Industrials	21.6%	13.6%
Financial Services	14.2%	2.0%
Real Estate	3.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.5%	11.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	2.9%
Basic Materials	-	2.5%
Communication Services	-	5.9%
Energy	-	1.1%
Utilities	-	2.8%

Return for Risk

TMFM vs. QQQJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

TMFM

TMFM Risk / Return Rank: 3
TMFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
TMFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
TMFM Omega Ratio Rank: 3
TMFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
TMFM Martin Ratio Rank: 4

QQQJ

QQQJ Risk / Return Rank: 77
QQQJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
QQQJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
QQQJ Omega Ratio Rank: 73
QQQJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
QQQJ Martin Ratio Rank: 82

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) and Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQQJ). 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.

	TMFM	QQQJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.80	1.73	-2.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.10	2.41	-3.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.88	1.30	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.62	2.80	-3.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.07	11.02	-12.10

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMFM Sharpe Ratio is -0.80, which is lower than the QQQJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMFM and QQQJ, 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

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFM drawdown since its inception was -31.75%, smaller than the maximum QQQJ drawdown of -39.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFM and QQQJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFM	QQQJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.75%	-39.57%	+7.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.13%	-11.84%	-13.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.75%	-22.46%	-9.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-39.57%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.34%	-3.66%	-19.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.16%	-15.38%	-0.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.51%	3.00%	+11.51%

Volatility

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Volatility Comparison

Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) has a higher volatility of 6.01% compared to Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQQJ) at 3.49%. This indicates that TMFM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQQJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMFM	QQQJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.01%	3.49%	+2.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.23%	15.46%	+0.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.69%	19.15%	+0.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.60%	22.14%	-1.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.60%	21.96%	-1.36%

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMFM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQJ's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMFM vs. QQQJ - Dividend Comparison

TMFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than QQQJ's 0.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QQQJ Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF	0.56%	0.85%	0.77%	0.67%	0.76%	0.91%	0.09%
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.07%	0.06%	16.27%	2.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMFM and QQQJ in my portfolio?

TMFM and QQQJ have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMFM or QQQJ?

TMFM has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to QQQJ (3.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFM dropped -31.75% vs QQQJ's -39.57%.

Which ETF is better, TMFM or QQQJ?

On 3-year performance, QQQJ leads with 19.03% vs 1.83% for TMFM. On fees, QQQJ is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QQQJ has been the lower-risk option at 3.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMFM or QQQJ?

Over the 3-year period, QQQJ has performed better with a 19.03% return vs 1.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMFM or QQQJ?

QQQJ is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TMFM or QQQJ?

QQQJ has the higher dividend yield at 0.56%, compared with 0.07% for TMFM.

What is the main difference between TMFM and QQQJ?

They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFM and 0.15% for QQQJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs -0.80), 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.