XMAG vs. QQQT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMAG (Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF) and QQQT (Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMAG is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the BITA US 500 ex Magnificent 7 Index, while QQQT is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Defiance. XMAG is passively managed, while QQQT is actively managed. Over the past year, XMAG returned 24.62% vs 34.63% for QQQT. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMAG charges 0.35%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for QQQT.

Performance

XMAG vs. QQQT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF (XMAG) and Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMAG achieves a 12.73% return, which is significantly lower than QQQT's 19.45% return.

XMAG

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 6.69%
• YTD: 12.73%
• 6M: 13.28%
• 1Y: 24.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQT

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 9.90%
• YTD: 19.45%
• 6M: 17.66%
• 1Y: 34.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XMAG vs. QQQT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XMAG Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF	12.73%	15.63%	-1.67%
QQQT Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF	19.45%	14.04%	2.67%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAG and QQQT is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2024	0.75

The correlation between XMAG and QQQT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMAG vs. QQQT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMAG	QQQT
Technology	25.3%	54.2%
Financial Services	17.3%	99.8%
Healthcare	13.0%	4.2%
Industrials	12.6%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	7.3%	7.6%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	12.2%
Energy	5.5%	0.6%
Communication Services	3.9%	15.5%
Utilities	3.4%	1.4%
Real Estate	2.9%	0.1%
Basic Materials	2.5%	1.2%

Return for Risk

XMAG vs. QQQT — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMAG

XMAG Risk / Return Rank: 68
XMAG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
XMAG Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
XMAG Omega Ratio Rank: 63
XMAG Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
XMAG Martin Ratio Rank: 77

QQQT

QQQT Risk / Return Rank: 64
QQQT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
QQQT Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
QQQT Omega Ratio Rank: 72
QQQT Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
QQQT Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

XMAG vs. QQQT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF (XMAG) and Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT). 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.

	XMAG	QQQT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.23	2.38	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.21	3.21	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.44	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.39	2.73	+0.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.15	9.59	+5.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMAG vs. QQQT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAG Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the QQQT Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAG and QQQT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMAG	QQQT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.23	2.38	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.11	0.99	+0.12

Drawdowns

XMAG vs. QQQT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAG drawdown since its inception was -16.17%, smaller than the maximum QQQT drawdown of -22.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAG and QQQT.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMAG	QQQT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.17%	-22.50%	+6.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.29%	-12.73%	+5.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.29%	+0.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.13%	-4.01%	+1.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.63%	3.62%	-1.99%

Volatility

XMAG vs. QQQT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF (XMAG) is 2.87%, while Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT) has a volatility of 4.04%. This indicates that XMAG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMAG	QQQT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.87%	4.04%	-1.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.65%	11.20%	-2.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.10%	14.61%	-3.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.12%	20.24%	-5.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.12%	20.24%	-5.12%

XMAG vs. QQQT - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMAG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQT's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMAG vs. QQQT - Dividend Comparison

XMAG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%, less than QQQT's 19.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
QQQT Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF	19.16%	21.27%	10.35%
XMAG Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF	0.46%	0.51%	0.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMAG and QQQT in my portfolio?

XMAG and QQQT have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XMAG or QQQT?

QQQT has higher volatility (4.04%) compared to XMAG (2.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMAG dropped -16.17% vs QQQT's -22.50%.

Which ETF is better, XMAG or QQQT?

On 1-year performance, QQQT leads with 34.63% vs 24.62% for XMAG. On fees, XMAG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XMAG has been the lower-risk option at 2.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XMAG or QQQT?

Over the 1-year period, QQQT has performed better with a 34.63% return vs 24.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMAG or QQQT?

XMAG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for QQQT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XMAG or QQQT?

QQQT has the higher dividend yield at 19.16%, compared with 0.46% for XMAG.

What is the main difference between XMAG and QQQT?

XMAG is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while QQQT is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XMAG and 1.05% for QQQT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 2.23), 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.