XLG vs. QQQM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XLG returned 14.28%/yr vs 16.11%/yr for QQQM. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. XLG charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.

Performance

XLG vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) 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, XLG achieves a 1.60% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 16.48% return.

XLG

• 1D: -1.88%
• 1M: -5.41%
• YTD: 1.60%
• 6M: 0.73%
• 1Y: 19.95%
• 3Y*: 21.35%
• 5Y*: 14.28%
• 10Y*: 16.94%

QQQM

• 1D: -3.30%
• 1M: -0.42%
• YTD: 16.48%
• 6M: 15.00%
• 1Y: 34.99%
• 3Y*: 26.15%
• 5Y*: 16.11%
• 10Y*: —

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

XLG vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	1.60%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	30.77%	4.11%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	16.48%	20.85%	25.68%	55.01%	-32.52%	27.45%	6.64%

Correlation

The correlation between XLG and QQQM is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2020	0.96

The correlation between XLG and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLG vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XLG	QQQM
Technology	46.8%	58.7%
Communication Services	16.0%	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	11.2%	11.4%
Financial Services	9.0%	0.2%
Healthcare	7.0%	3.7%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	6.4%
Energy	2.4%	0.5%
Industrials	1.9%	2.6%
Basic Materials	0.6%	1.0%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

XLG vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 39
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 41
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 38

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 60
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

XLG vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) 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.

	XLG	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.97	-0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.98	2.58	-0.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.35	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.61	2.94	-1.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.77	10.88	-5.11

XLG vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLG Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLG 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

XLG vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLG drawdown since its inception was -52.39%, which is greater than QQQM's maximum drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLG and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	XLG	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.39%	-35.04%	-17.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.41%	-11.96%	-0.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.70%	-22.70%	+2.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.02%	-35.04%	+7.02%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.46%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.91%	-4.24%	-2.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.63%	-8.20%	+0.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	3.22%	+0.24%

Volatility

XLG vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) is 5.04%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 9.00%. This indicates that XLG 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

	XLG	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.04%	9.00%	-3.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.74%	14.43%	-3.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.98%	17.85%	-3.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.79%	22.53%	-3.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.88%	22.30%	-3.42%

XLG vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLG has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XLG vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

XLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%, more than QQQM's 0.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.44%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.66%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XLG and QQQM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, XLG and QQQM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, XLG or QQQM?

QQQM has higher volatility (9.00%) compared to XLG (5.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLG dropped -52.39% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, XLG or QQQM?

On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 16.11% vs 14.28% for XLG. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 5.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XLG or QQQM?

Over the 5-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 16.11% return vs 14.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XLG or QQQM?

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XLG.

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

XLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.66%, compared with 0.44% for QQQM.

What is the main difference between XLG and QQQM?

XLG is categorized as S&P 500, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XLG and 0.15% for QQQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs 1.44), 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.