Verified factor-similar pair

QQQM vs QYLG

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
83
Verified similar

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

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

QYLG

Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF
HML
Adj. R2
0.925
Rel. Sharpe
1.103
Mkt beta
0.83
AUM
US$135M
MER
0.35%
Valuation
92

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
QQQM
-0.17
|t|
-2.3
QYLG
-0.10
|t|
-1.6
diff -0.07
HML
QQQM
-0.31
|t|
-4.7
QYLG
-0.30
|t|
-5.4
diff -0.01
RMW
QQQM
-0.07
|t|
-0.9
QYLG
-0.07
|t|
-1.1
diff -0.00
CMA
QQQM
-0.09
|t|
-1.1
QYLG
+0.04
|t|
+0.6
diff -0.14
UMD
QQQM
-0.04
|t|
-0.7
QYLG
-0.08
|t|
-1.8
diff +0.04

Why This Pair Matches

Exposure level
83
Exposure shape
95
Mkt beta diff
0.27
Rel. Sharpe diff
0.022

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.

QQQM fund page QYLG 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.