QQQ vs QQQM: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
QQQ and QQQM are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. QQQ is Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1, while QQQM is Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF. QQQM has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has QQQ ahead on AIQ Score, 51 versus 49.
What is the main difference between QQQ and QQQM?
QQQ and QQQM hold essentially the same portfolio: 99.5% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | QQQ | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.15% |
| Holdings | 107 | 109 |
| Top-10 concentration | 47% | 47% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 0.43% | 0.45% |
| Average volume | 37,968,274 | 3,112,240 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +19.6% | +19.7% |
| YTD return | +16.8% | +16.9% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +14.6% | +14.7% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 19.9% | 19.8% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -12.2% | -12.2% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -35.1% | -35% |
| Beta | 1.45 | 1.44 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.77 | 0.78 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.20 | 1.21 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 51/100 | 49/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 4/10 | 4/10 |
| Momentum | 21/100 | 31/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 72/100 | 72/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQ leads
QQQ leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 5 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 0 of 4 evidence groups support QQQ, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors QQQ over QQQM, 51 versus 49 as of Oct 21, 2026. QQQ's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while QQQM holds the stronger momentum profile. QQQ also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 0 of 4 covered evidence groups favor QQQ today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. QQQ lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
QQQ vs QQQM: which fits what
Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.
| If you want | QQQ | QQQM | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.18% | 0.15% | QQQM |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 107 | 109 | Similar |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 47% | 47% | Similar |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 0.43% | 0.45% | Similar |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -35.1% | -35% | Similar |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 19.9% | 19.8% | Similar |
Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare QQQ and QQQM against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality82 vs 68QQQ +14
- Momentum21 vs 31QQQM +10
- Value35 vs 35Even
- Risk Resilience72 vs 72Even
0 of 4 evidence groups favor QQQ. QQQ’s edge is concentrated in quality; QQQM keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Value -1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
QQQ's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — QQQ and QQQM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
QQQ (Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF): the counter-case, on momentum.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | QQQ | QQQM | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.15% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 107 | 109 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 37,968,274 | 3,112,240 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 19.9% | 19.8% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -12.2% | -12.2% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.77 | 0.78 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.45 | 1.44 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.
How much of the same holdings they own
QQQ and QQQM share 99.51% of their weighted exposure across 102 common holdings.
Every QQQ holding is also in QQQM, and 1 holding is unique to QQQM. Owning both adds little diversification — they are largely the same exposure in different wrappers.
QQQM is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 46.98% of the fund, against 46.96% for QQQ (109 holdings vs 107). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | QQQ | QQQM | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 8.49% | 8.49% | 8.49% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 7.71% | 7.71% | 7.71% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.88% | 5.88% | 5.88% |
| MUMicron Technology Inc | 4.89% | 4.89% | 4.89% |
| AMZNAmazon.com Inc | 4.36% | 4.36% | 4.36% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.64% | 3.64% | 3.64% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 3.11% | 3.11% | 3.11% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.07% | 3.07% | 3.07% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What QQQ adds that QQQM doesn’t
QQQ has no position of 0.01% or more that QQQM lacks or holds at under half the weight.
What QQQM adds that QQQ doesn’t
| Holding | QQQM | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| AGPXXInvesco Government & Agency Portfolio | 0.13% | Not held |
Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.
QQQ vs QQQM: five-year payout growth
QQQM grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 43.59% a year against QQQ's 9.99%. QQQM: The payout jumped 217.1% in 2021, a single step rather than steady compounding - often an index or mandate change.
| Dividend metric | QQQ | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 9.99% | 43.59% |
| 2020 annual payout | $1.737 | $0.206 |
| 2025 annual payout | $2.795 | $1.259 |
| Calendar-year declines | 2 | 1 |
| Peer rank | #56 of 138 | #12 of 138 |
Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
0 of 4 covered evidence groups favor QQQ. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 51 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Even | Value 35 vs 35 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -0.2% vs -0.2%; vs 200-day 6.2% vs 6.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 72 vs 72 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of QQQ and QQQM and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 0 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on QQQ.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20QQQ lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- QQQ +2
- 51 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- QQQ +3
- 57 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- QQQ +5
- 65 vs 60
- 90 sessions ago
- QQQ +6
- 67 vs 61
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
QQQ and QQQM carry the same 3 signals, so the signals do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, Keltner Channel Breakdown, MACD Bearish Crossover.
QQQ leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.05%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.03%, AIQ -1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1QQQM closes the Quality gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to QQQ's edge.
- 2QQQM's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3QQQ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate QQQ's advantage entirely.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Performance
QQQM leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | QQQ | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.5% | -3.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4% | -4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.7% | 1.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 11.4% | 11.4% |
| Year to date | 16.8% | 16.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 19.6% | 19.7% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | QQQ | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.2 | 37.2 |
| ADX (14) | 20.3 | 20.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.2% | -0.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.2% | 6.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.4% | 15.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | QQQ | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.45 | 1.44 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.77 | 0.78 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.2 | 1.21 |
| Max drawdown | -12.2% | -12.2% |
| Current drawdown | -5.5% | -5.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 19.9% | 19.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.9% | -1.9% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between QQQ and QQQM?
QQQ and QQQM hold essentially the same portfolio: 99.5% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do QQQ and QQQM overlap?
QQQ and QQQM share 99.51% of their weighted exposure across 102 common holdings. Every QQQ holding is also in QQQM, and 1 holding is unique to QQQM. Owning both adds little diversification — they are largely the same exposure in different wrappers.
Which ETF is more diversified, QQQ or QQQM?
They hold a similar number of positions: 107 for QQQ and 109 for QQQM.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
QQQM has the lower expense ratio, 0.15% a year against 0.18% for QQQ.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
Their trailing 12-month distribution yields are similar: 0.43% for QQQ and 0.45% for QQQM.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
Their volatility over the past year is similar: 19.9% annualized for QQQ and 19.8% for QQQM.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past five years are similar: -35.1% for QQQ and -35% for QQQM.
Compare QQQ and QQQM with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.