Screener
NATO vs QQH
Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF vs HCM Defender 100 Index ETF
Key differences
- NATO costs 0.63% less per year.
- QQH is significantly larger than NATO — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- NATO is classified as equity, while QQH is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- NATO follows a index tracking strategy; QQH uses active selection.
- QQH has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| NATO | QQH | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.35% | 0.98% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $99M | $697M |
| Since | 2024 | 2019 |
| Dividend yield | 0.45% | 0.21% |
| Asset class | equity | alternative |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +23.3% | +44.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +28.0% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +15.8% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 1.08 |
| Volatility 1Y | 20.70% | 20.80% |
| Max drawdown | -15.99% | -41.87% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to NATO and QQH
Explore further