Fund comparison
QQQ vs QQQM
Invesco QQQ Trust against Invesco Nasdaq 100 ETF.
Verdict
These are the same fund at two prices. QQQM tracks the identical index with the identical holdings and charges 0.15% against 0.18%. Unless you trade options on it, there is no reason to hold QQQ instead.
The overlap here is 99.8%, and the missing 0.2% is a cash sweep position, not a difference in strategy. Both funds hold the same 105 companies at the same weights, tracking the Nasdaq-100. Their weekly returns correlate at 1.00 across one, three and five years, and their three-year returns differ by less than half a point, 91.1% against 90.7%, which is roughly the fee gap compounding.
Invesco launched QQQM in 2020 as the cheaper version of its own fund, for buy-and-hold investors, and left QQQ alone because it is one of the most heavily traded instruments in the world. That trading volume is the real difference. QQQ has a deep options market and tighter spreads for large orders; QQQM does not.
So the rule is simple. If you are buying and holding, QQQM saves you 0.03% a year, which is $3 per $10,000 and compounds quietly. If you trade actively or write options, the liquidity of QQQ is worth more than the fee. Holding both makes no sense in any case, and if you already do, you own one position split across two tickers.
Where they hold the same companies
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Overlap by weight | 99.8% |
| Share of QQQ held in common with QQQM | 100.0% |
| Share of QQQM held in common with QQQ | 99.9% |
| Companies in both | 105 |
| Positions in QQQ / QQQM | 105 / 106 |
QQQ holdings as published 2026-09-01, QQQM 2026-09-01.
Largest positions held by both
| Company | In QQQ | In QQQM | Counted as overlap |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDA | 8.49% | 8.49% | 8.49% |
| AAPL | 7.71% | 7.71% | 7.71% |
| MSFT | 6.02% | 6.02% | 6.02% |
| MU | 4.69% | 4.69% | 4.69% |
| AMZN | 4.43% | 4.42% | 4.42% |
| AMD | 3.34% | 3.34% | 3.34% |
| GOOGL | 3.15% | 3.15% | 3.15% |
| GOOG | 2.92% | 2.92% | 2.92% |
| TSLA | 2.87% | 2.87% | 2.87% |
| AVGO | 2.83% | 2.83% | 2.83% |
| META | 2.77% | 2.76% | 2.76% |
| WMT | 2.31% | 2.31% | 2.31% |
| INTC | 1.99% | 1.99% | 1.99% |
| CSCO | 1.93% | 1.93% | 1.93% |
| COST | 1.86% | 1.86% | 1.86% |
Held by only one of them
| In QQQ only | Weight | In QQQM only | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| AGPXX | 0.13% |
Cost, returns and risk
| QQQ | QQQM | |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.15% |
| Dividend yield | 0.44% | 0.46% |
| Total return, 1 year | 25.7% | 25.8% |
| Total return, 3 years cumulative | 90.7% | 91.1% |
| Total return, 5 years cumulative | 91.7% | 92.4% |
| Volatility, annualised on 3 years of weekly returns | 19.6% | 19.5% |
| Worst fall in 3 years, peak to trough | -22.8% | -22.7% |
| Beta against the S&P 500 | 1.28 | 1.28 |
| Positions held | 104 | 105 |
| Weight in the ten largest positions | 46.4% | 46.4% |
| Weight in the single largest position | 8.5% | 8.5% |
| Assets under management | $452.8B | $97.1B |
Prices through 2026-09-02.
Year by year
| Year | QQQ | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 15.5% | 15.5% |
| 2025 | 20.8% | 20.9% |
| 2024 | 25.6% | 25.7% |
| 2023 | 54.9% | 55.0% |
| 2022 | -32.6% | -32.5% |
Do they move together
| Window | Correlation of weekly returns |
|---|---|
| 1 year | 1.00 |
| 3 years | 1.00 |
| 5 years | 1.00 |
How these numbers are produced · Portfolio x-ray · Overlap checker