Verified factor-similar pair

ILCG vs QQQM

These two ETFs pass the same FF6 US similarity lane: US-listed equity ETFs, same USD model basis, at least one material non-market factor, and 100% overlap in statistically significant material factor exposure.

HML
Similarity score
86
Verified similar

Score blends exposure-level distance, factor-vector shape, market-beta closeness, and a small backtested relative-Sharpe term.

ILCG

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
HML
Adj. R2
0.957
Rel. Sharpe
0.678
Mkt beta
1.10
AUM
US$2.7B
MER
0.04%
Valuation
165

QQQM

Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
HML
Adj. R2
0.939
Rel. Sharpe
1.126
Mkt beta
1.10
AUM
US$74.7B
MER
0.15%
Valuation
143

Factor Exposure Match

Blue bars compare raw factor beta magnitude. Green bars compare absolute t-stat strength. Dim bars indicate the t-stat is below 1.96.

SMB
ILCG
-0.12
|t|
-4.3
QQQM
-0.17
|t|
-2.3
diff +0.05
HML
ILCG
-0.31
|t|
-11.3
QQQM
-0.31
|t|
-4.7
diff +0.00
RMW
ILCG
-0.01
|t|
-0.2
QQQM
-0.07
|t|
-0.9
diff +0.07
CMA
ILCG
-0.13
|t|
-3.2
QQQM
-0.09
|t|
-1.1
diff -0.04
UMD
ILCG
+0.05
|t|
+2.8
QQQM
-0.04
|t|
-0.7
diff +0.08

Why This Pair Matches

Exposure level
85
Exposure shape
97
Mkt beta diff
0.00
Rel. Sharpe diff
0.448

This comparison focuses on measured factor exposure, not a qualitative review of each fund's portfolio-construction process. Backtested relative Sharpe is included as a secondary signal, while we continue refining a comparison metric that separates factor payoff from alpha. See methodology.

ILCG fund page QQQM fund page US ETF Leaders US Universe
Important context

VerifiedBeta publishes educational ETF research, not personalized investment advice, portfolio management, or security recommendations. Funds that screen well here can still be unsuitable for your objectives, taxes, liquidity needs, or constraints. Review fund documents, methodology assumptions, and your own circumstances before acting. See the full disclaimer.