Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100 (XLK vs QQQ) 2026: Returns, Risk & Volatility

Q: Which is a better investment: XLK or QQQ?

Over the past year, XLK looks like the better investment: it had higher total return (XLK +50.5% vs QQQ +36.8%) and a higher Sharpe ratio (XLK 1.93 vs QQQ 1.80). On risk, QQQ was less volatile (QQQ 16.0% vs XLK 20.4%), QQQ had a smaller max drawdown (QQQ -12.1% vs XLK -15.9%), and QQQ had less severe losses on the worst 5% of days (Expected Shortfall of QQQ -2.17% vs XLK -2.75%).

Written by Gale Finance Team

Reviewed by Sid Kalla CFA Charterholder

Quick answer

Which is a better investment: XLK or QQQ?

Over the past year, XLK outperformed QQQ. XLK returned +50.5% compared with QQQ’s +36.8%. XLK had the better risk-adjusted return, with a Sharpe ratio of 1.93 versus QQQ’s 1.80. QQQ was less volatile than XLK, and QQQ had a smaller max drawdown than XLK.

Total Return

XLK +50.5%

QQQ +36.8%

Sharpe Ratio

XLK 1.93

QQQ 1.80

Annualized Volatility

XLK 20.4%

QQQ 16.0%

Max Drawdown

XLK -15.9%

QQQ -12.1%

Metric winners: Total Return: XLK; Sharpe Ratio: XLK; Annualized Volatility: QQQ (less volatile); Max Drawdown: QQQ (smaller drawdown).

XLK Total Return

↑ +50.5%

QQQ Total Return

↑ +36.8%

Relative Performance of XLK vs QQQ (Normalized to 100)

XLK QQQ

Normalized to 100 at start date for comparison

Trade XLK or QQQ

Access these assets on trusted platforms.

Hyperliquid

Trade perpetual futures exposure where supportedXLKQQQTrade on Hyperliquid

Binance

Trade futures exposure on a global exchange where supportedXLKQQQTrade on Binance

Affiliate disclosure

Key Takeaways

Total Return: XLK delivered a +50.5% total return, while QQQ returned +36.8% over the same period. XLK outperformed on total returns.
Risk-Adjusted Return (Sharpe Ratio): XLK had a higher Sharpe (1.93 vs 1.80), indicating better risk-adjusted performance.
Volatility (Annualized): XLK was more volatile, with 20.4% annualized volatility, versus 16.0% for QQQ.
Maximum Drawdown: QQQ's maximum drawdown was -12.1%, while XLK experienced a deeper drawdown of -15.9%.
Tail Risk (VaR & Expected Shortfall): At the 5% level (daily log returns), XLK's VaR was -2.18% and its Expected Shortfall (CVaR) was -2.75%; QQQ's were -1.87% and -2.17%. VaR is the cutoff; Expected Shortfall is the average move on the worst days.
Skew & Kurtosis: Skew: XLK -0.28 vs QQQ -0.24. Excess kurtosis: XLK 0.69 vs QQQ 0.82. Negative skew leans downside; higher excess kurtosis means fatter tails.
Tail Days & Extremes: 2σ tail days (down/up): XLK 9/5, QQQ 10/6. Worst day: XLK -4.07% (2025-10-10) vs QQQ -3.47% (2025-10-10). Best day: XLK +4.24% (2026-03-31) vs QQQ +3.39% (2026-03-31).
Risk ratios: Sortino - XLK: 2.85 vs. QQQ: 2.69 , Calmar - XLK: 3.20 vs. QQQ: 3.07 , Sterling - XLK: 2.93 vs. QQQ: 2.73 , Treynor - XLK: 0.26 vs. QQQ: 0.23 , Ulcer Index - XLK: 4.76% vs. QQQ: 3.14%

Investment Comparison

If you invested $10,000 in each asset on May 14, 2025:

XLK $15,050.53 +50.5%

QQQ $13,683.8 +36.8%

Difference: $1,366.73 (XLK ahead)

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100 Performance Over Time

Metric	XLK	QQQ
30 Days	22.8%	15.7%
90 Days	22.7%	15.4%
180 Days	22.6%	16.4%
1 Year	50.5%	36.8%

Shorter time frames can show different leaders as market conditions change. Consider your investment horizon when comparing performance.

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100 Correlation

Average Correlation

strongly correlated

0.95

Current (30-day) 0.94

30-day rolling range +0.82 to +0.98

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund and Nasdaq 100 are strongly correlated over the past year. With a correlation of 0.95, these assets tend to move together, limiting diversification benefits.

For portfolio construction, this strong correlation means holding both XLK and QQQ provides limited risk reduction — they're likely to decline together in downturns.

Metric	Value
Current (30-day)	0.94
Average (full period)	0.95
Minimum (30-day rolling)	0.82
Maximum (30-day rolling)	0.98

Correlation measures how closely two assets move together. Values near +1 indicate strong co-movement, near 0 indicates independence, and negative values indicate inverse movement. Current, minimum, and maximum figures are 30-day rolling correlations on shared daily returns.

Drawdown

Maximum Drawdown

XLK

-15.9%

QQQ

-12.1%

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund experienced its maximum drawdown of -15.9% from 2025-10-29 to 2026-03-30. It took 17 days to recover.

Nasdaq 100 experienced its maximum drawdown of -12.1% from 2025-10-29 to 2026-03-30. It took 16 days to recover.

Smaller drawdowns and faster recoveries indicate lower downside risk and greater resilience during market stress.

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100 Volatility (XLK vs QQQ)

XLK Volatility

20.4%

±1.29% 1-day vol

QQQ Volatility

16.0%

±1.01% 1-day vol

1-day volatility (1σ)

XLK

±1.29%

QQQ

±1.01%

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund's 20.4% annualized volatility translates to about ±1.29% one-standard-deviation daily volatility.

Nasdaq 100's 16.0% annualized volatility translates to about ±1.01% one-standard-deviation daily volatility.

XLK had the wider volatility profile over this window. That means its day-to-day return distribution was broader; QQQ was calmer, but lower volatility does not by itself mean better returns.

Treat the ± daily figure as a one-standard-deviation estimate from historical returns, not a forecast or expected absolute daily move. For context, 15-18% annualized volatility is roughly ±1% one-standard-deviation daily volatility.

Risk-adjusted ratios

Sharpe Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Sharpe Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Return per total volatility

Sharpe gives us excess return per unit of risk. Upside and downside volatility both count as risk.

Higher is better

excess return / total volatility

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Sharpe} = \frac{\mathbb{E}[R] - R_f}{\sigma_R}

Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk (volatility). A higher Sharpe indicates better risk-adjusted performance. XLK had a higher Sharpe (1.93 vs 1.80), indicating better risk-adjusted performance.

A Sharpe above 1.0 is generally considered good, above 2.0 is excellent. Negative Sharpe means the asset underperformed the risk-free rate. Calculated on each asset's full 365-day lookback of available prices and annualized using the asset calendar (365 for crypto, 252 trading days for equities/ETFs/metals).

Sortino Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Sortino Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Return per downside volatility

Sortino keeps the return-over-risk idea, but only returns below the target rate count as volatility.

Higher is better

excess return / downside volatility

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Sortino} = \frac{\mathbb{E}[R] - R_f}{\sigma_{\mathrm{down}}}

Sortino ratio measures return per unit of downside risk. Unlike Sharpe, it only counts downside deviation (returns below the target return). XLK had better downside-adjusted returns.

A higher Sortino is better. It's useful when upside volatility is common (crypto is the obvious example). Downside deviation: XLK 13.8% vs QQQ 10.7%. Calculated on each asset's full 365-day lookback of available prices, using the daily risk-free rate as the target return, and annualized using the asset calendar (365 for crypto, 252 trading days for equities/ETFs/metals).

Calmar Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Calmar Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

CAGR per worst drawdown

Calmar compares CAGR against the single deepest peak-to-trough loss over the period.

Higher is better

CAGR / max drawdown

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Calmar} = \frac{\mathrm{CAGR}}{|\mathrm{MaxDD}|}

Calmar ratio compares CAGR to maximum drawdown. Higher Calmar means more return per unit of worst drawdown. XLK posted the higher Calmar ratio.

Calmar is computed on each asset's full 365-day lookback and uses the max drawdown over that same window.

Sterling Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Sterling Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Return per average drawdown

Sterling smooths the drawdown penalty by using average drawdown events instead of only the worst one.

Higher is better

excess annual return / average deep drawdown

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Sterling} = \frac{\mathrm{CAGR} - R_f}{\overline{D}_{>10\%}}

Sterling ratio measures excess return per unit of average drawdown (typically drawdowns worse than 10%). XLK posted the higher Sterling ratio.

Sterling uses average drawdown events deeper than 10% and subtracts the risk-free rate to report excess return.

Treynor Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Treynor Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Excess return per market beta

Treynor divides excess annualized return by beta — the sensitivity of the asset to broad-market moves. The slope shown is each asset’s beta vs SPY.

Higher is better

excess return / market beta

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Treynor} = \frac{\mathbb{E}[R] - R_f}{\beta}

Treynor ratio measures excess return per unit of market risk (beta) instead of total volatility. XLK posted the higher Treynor ratio.

Treynor uses beta vs the S&P 500 (SPY) on shared dates and the average 3-month Treasury rate as the risk-free rate.

Ulcer Index of XLK and QQQ

Ulcer Index: XLK vs. QQQ

Drawdown pain

Ulcer Index is a risk index, not a return-over-risk ratio. Lower means smaller and shorter drawdowns.

Lower is better

root-mean-square drawdown

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{UI} = \sqrt{\mathbb{E}[D_t^2]}

Ulcer Index captures drawdown depth and duration. Lower Ulcer Index means less drawdown pain. QQQ had the lower Ulcer Index (less drawdown pain).

Ulcer Index is computed from each asset's drawdown series over the full lookback window.

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape (1-Year): Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs. Nasdaq 100

This section looks at the shape of daily returns, not just the average. Tail stats are computed per asset on its own daily series (crypto includes weekends). We use daily log returns $\ln\left(\frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}}\right)$ so multi-day moves add cleanly.

Definitions: Value at Risk (VaR), Expected Shortfall, skew, kurtosis, and fat tails.

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape: XLK vs. QQQ (1-Year)

Actual daily return tails

The bars are real daily log-return observations from the article window. Darker bars are observations at or beyond each asset’s 5% VaR cutoff.

Observed returns

VaR marks the 5th percentile loss cutoff; Expected Shortfall averages the observations beyond that cutoff.

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{VaR}_{5\%}=Q_{0.05}(r_t),\quad \mathrm{ES}_{5\%}=\mathbb{E}[r_t\mid r_t\le \mathrm{VaR}_{5\%}]

Metric (1-Year)	XLK	QQQ
5% VaR (daily log return)	-2.18%	-1.87%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-2.75% (worst 13 days)	-2.17% (worst 13 days)
Skew	-0.28	-0.24
Excess kurtosis	0.69	0.82
2σ tail days (down / up)	9 / 5	10 / 6
Worst day	-4.07% (2025-10-10)	-3.47% (2025-10-10)
Best day	+4.24% (2026-03-31)	+3.39% (2026-03-31)

Downside co-moves (2σ) — 1-Year

Computed on shared dates only (n=249). A “2σ downside move” means a shared-close log return more than 2 standard deviations below that asset’s own mean on this shared-date series. Dates below show simple returns (%) for readability.

Downside co-move map: XLK vs. QQQ (2σ)

Shared-close daily returns

Dots mark actual downside days: asset-colored dots are one-sided downside moves, and red dots are joint downside days. Grey dots add sampled shared-return context when available. The shaded lower-left zone shows where both XLK and QQQ crossed their own 2σ downside threshold.

2σ

Show downside tail dates

Dates below are shared-date observations. The “Date” is the period end (close). Tail thresholds are computed on log returns, but the table shows simple returns (%) for readability. Returns are computed from the previous shared close to this one (for example, Friday → Monday includes weekend moves).

Days when both XLK and QQQ had a big down day (2σ)

Date (interval)	XLK	QQQ
2025-10-10	-4.07%	-3.47%
2025-11-04	-2.64%	-2.03%
2025-11-13	-2.49%	-2.04%
2025-11-20	-3.14%	-2.37%
2025-12-12	-2.89%	-1.91%
2026-01-16 → 2026-01-20	-2.60%	-2.12%
2026-02-12	-2.63%	-2.03%
2026-03-26	-3.11%	-2.39%

Days when XLK had a big down day

Date (interval)	XLK	QQQ
2025-10-10	-4.07%	-3.47%
2025-11-04	-2.64%	-2.03%
2025-11-13	-2.49%	-2.04%
2025-11-20	-3.14%	-2.37%
2025-12-12	-2.89%	-1.91%
2026-01-16 → 2026-01-20	-2.60%	-2.12%
2026-02-04	-2.79%	-1.75%
2026-02-12	-2.63%	-2.03%
2026-03-26	-3.11%	-2.39%

Days when QQQ had a big down day

Date (interval)	XLK	QQQ
2025-08-01	-2.16%	-1.97%
2025-10-10	-4.07%	-3.47%
2025-11-04	-2.64%	-2.03%
2025-11-13	-2.49%	-2.04%
2025-11-20	-3.14%	-2.37%
2025-12-12	-2.89%	-1.91%
2026-01-16 → 2026-01-20	-2.60%	-2.12%
2026-02-12	-2.63%	-2.03%
2026-03-26	-3.11%	-2.39%
2026-03-27	-1.95%	-1.95%

Read this as “how ugly the ugly days get”, not as a precise forecast. One-year samples are small, so tail estimates are inherently noisy.

Full Comparison of Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs. Nasdaq 100 (1-Year)

Metric	XLK	QQQ
Total Return	+50.5%	+36.8%
Annualized Volatility	20.4%	16.0%
Sharpe Ratio	1.93	1.80
Sortino Ratio	2.85	2.69
Calmar Ratio	3.20	3.07
Sterling Ratio	2.93	2.73
Treynor Ratio	0.26	0.23
Ulcer Index	4.76%	3.14%
Max Drawdown	-15.9%	-12.1%
Avg Correlation to S&P 500	0.89	0.95
5% VaR (daily log return)	-2.18%	-1.87%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-2.75%	-2.17%
Skew	-0.28	-0.24
Excess kurtosis	0.69	0.82
2σ tail days (down / up)	9 / 5	10 / 6

Audit this calculation

Formulas, inputs, and conventions used to compute the metrics on this page.

Inputs & conventions

Shared window for pair metrics: 2025-05-14 → 2026-05-12 (last shared close).
Rolling correlation sample (shared closes): 220 rolling 30-day values (from 249 shared daily returns).
Annualization (days/year): XLK: 252 days/year; QQQ: 252 days/year.
Risk-free rate: Uses the 3-month U.S. Treasury yield (FRED: DGS3MO), averaged over each asset’s window:

XLK: 4.15% over 2025-05-14 → 2026-05-12.

QQQ: 4.15% over 2025-05-14 → 2026-05-12.
Volatility drag (rule of thumb): Estimated from annualized volatility (simple returns). For the log-return framing, see Log returns.

XLK: ≈ -2.1%/yr

QQQ: ≈ -1.3%/yr
Data alignment: No forward fill. Correlation and tail co-moves are computed on shared closes only.
For cross-calendar pairs (e.g., crypto vs stocks), weekend/holiday moves roll into the next shared close.
Return conventions: Volatility/Sharpe/Sortino use simple daily returns. Tail-risk uses daily log returns for distribution stats (but tables show simple returns). Log returns.

Formulas

Daily simple return

r_t = \frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}} - 1

Volatility

\sigma_{ann} = \sigma(r_t)\sqrt{A}

Volatility drag (approx.)

\text{drag} \approx \tfrac{1}{2}\sigma_{ann}^2

Sharpe Ratio

S = \frac{A\,\bar{r} - r_f}{\sigma(r_t)\sqrt{A}}

Sortino Ratio

So = \frac{A\,\bar{r} - r_f}{\sqrt{\mathbb{E}[\min(0,\,r_t - r_f/A)^2]}\,\sqrt{A}}

Maximum Drawdown

MDD = \min_t\left(\frac{P_t}{\max_{s \le t} P_s} - 1\right)

Average Correlation

\rho = \frac{\operatorname{cov}(r^A,\,r^B)}{\sigma_A\,\sigma_B}

Log returns

\ell_t = \ln\left(\frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}}\right)

Notation

$P_t$: Price on day t.
$r_t$: Simple daily return.
$\ell_t$: Log daily return.
$\bar{r}$: Average daily return.
$\sigma(r_t)$: Standard deviation of daily returns.
$A$: Annualization factor (days/year).
$r_f$: Annual risk-free rate.

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100: Frequently Asked Questions

Which has higher volatility: XLK or QQQ?

XLK showed higher volatility at 20.4% annualized, compared to 16.0% for QQQ Over the past year. Higher volatility means larger price swings in both directions.

Does XLK provide diversification when held with QQQ?

XLK and QQQ are strongly correlated over the past year, with an average correlation of 0.95. This strong correlation limits diversification benefits.

How bad are the worst 5% days for XLK vs QQQ?

Over the past year, XLK's 5% VaR was -2.18% and its 5% Expected Shortfall was -2.75% (worst 13 days). QQQ's were -1.87% and -2.17% (worst 13 days).

Do XLK and QQQ crash together on bad days?

On shared dates (n=249), when QQQ has a 2σ down day, XLK also does 80.0% (8/10 days). In the other direction, when XLK has one, QQQ also does 88.9% (8/9 days).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns: XLK or QQQ?

XLK showed better risk-adjusted performance with a Sharpe ratio of 1.93 versus QQQ's 1.80 Over the past year.

Can XLK and QQQ be combined in a portfolio?

Yes, though allocation sizing matters. Their strong correlation provides limited risk reduction since they tend to move together. XLK's higher volatility (20.4%) means even small allocations can materially impact overall portfolio risk.

Explore our financial glossary

Which is a better investment: XLK or QQQ?

Share This Comparison of XLK vs QQQ

Relative Performance of XLK vs QQQ (Normalized to 100)

Trade XLK or QQQ

Key Takeaways

Investment Comparison

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100 Performance Over Time

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100 Correlation

Drawdown

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100 Volatility (XLK vs QQQ)

Risk-adjusted ratios

Sharpe Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Sharpe Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Sortino Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Sortino Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Calmar Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Calmar Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Sterling Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Sterling Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Treynor Ratio of XLK and QQQ

Treynor Ratio: XLK vs. QQQ

Ulcer Index of XLK and QQQ

Ulcer Index: XLK vs. QQQ

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape (1-Year): Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs. Nasdaq 100

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape: XLK vs. QQQ (1-Year)

Downside co-moves (2σ) — 1-Year

Downside co-move map: XLK vs. QQQ (2σ)

Days when both XLK and QQQ had a big down day (2σ)

Days when XLK had a big down day

Days when QQQ had a big down day

Full Comparison of Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs. Nasdaq 100 (1-Year)

Inputs & conventions

Formulas

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund vs Nasdaq 100: Frequently Asked Questions

Which has higher volatility: XLK or QQQ?

Does XLK provide diversification when held with QQQ?

How bad are the worst 5% days for XLK vs QQQ?

Do XLK and QQQ crash together on bad days?

Which has better risk-adjusted returns: XLK or QQQ?

Can XLK and QQQ be combined in a portfolio?