QQQI vs SPY ETF Comparison
Compare QQQI and SPY across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between QQQI and SPY?
QQQI is NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF, while SPY is State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF. QQQI is tied to Equity; SPY is tied to Equity. SPY is broader by holdings count, with 504 positions versus 105 for QQQI. QQQI is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | QQQI | SPY | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.68% | 0.09% | Fund |
| Assets under management | $14.1B | $817.3B | Fund |
| Holdings | 105 | 504 | Fund |
| Top-10 concentration | 75.7% | 58.4% | Fund |
| Average volume | 201,630 | 73,651,172 | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | Equity | Equity | Fund |
| Annualized volatility | 16.9% | 12.8% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -13.7% | -9.1% | Risk |
| Beta | 1.18 | 1.00 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.06 | 1.19 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | 0.09 | 1.69 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 51/100 | 64/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 4/10 | 9/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 38/100 | 56/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 83/100 | 89/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
SPY leads
SPY leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum.
Stable: 4 of 4 evidence groups support SPY, and its current signal state is conflicted.
NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPY over QQQI, 64 versus 51 as of Sep 5, 2026. SPY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum. SPY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPY today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. SPY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions. SPY leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Compare QQQI and SPY 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.
- Quality30%65 vs 84SPY +19
- Momentum25%38 vs 56SPY +18
- Value30%32 vs 39SPY +7
- Risk Resilience15%83 vs 89SPY +6
4 of 4 evidence groups favor SPY. SPY’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +11
No new signals fired.
SPY's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — QQQI and SPY both carry a full feed there.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
SPYSPY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
SPYSPY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 points.
Momentum
SPYSPY on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
SPYSPY on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
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 | QQQI | SPY | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.68% | 0.09% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $14.1B | $817.3B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 10 | 504 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 201,630 | 73,651,172 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 16.9% | 12.8% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -13.7% | -9.1% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.06 | 1.19 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.18 | 1.00 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
QQQI and SPY share 81.82% of their weighted exposure across 87 common holdings.
QQQI is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 75.69% of the fund, against 58.42% for SPY (105 holdings vs 504). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
18 holdings are unique to QQQI and 417 to SPY. Owning both adds little diversification — they are largely the same exposure in different wrappers.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | QQQI | SPY | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple Inc | 14.68% | 14.45% | 14.45% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 11.61% | 11.36% | 11.36% |
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 8.73% | 8.29% | 8.29% |
| AMZNAmazon.com Inc | 8.7% | 7.6% | 7.6% |
| MUMicron Technology Inc | 9.97% | 3.24% | 3.24% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 3.08% | 3.01% | 3.01% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.66% | 2.53% | 2.53% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.86% | 2.4% | 2.4% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
ETF comparison questions
Short answers to the fund-specific questions behind this comparison.
Which ETF is more diversified, QQQI or SPY?
SPY currently has more reported holdings, with 504 positions versus 105.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
SPY has the lower reported expense ratio in the current fund profile.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
The current dataset does not show a higher-yield winner.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
QQQI has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
SPY has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
SPY currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 64 to 51.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SPY | 51 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | SPY | Value 32 vs 39 |
| Technicals | SPY | Price vs 50-day 0.1% vs 1.9%; vs 200-day 1.1% vs 8.6% |
| Risk Resilience | SPY | Risk Resilience 83 vs 89 |
| 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 QQQI and SPY and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 4 of 4 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 SPY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3SPY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SPY +13
- 51 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- SPY +12
- 52 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +14
- 57 vs 71
- 90 sessions ago
- SPY +5
- 55 vs 60
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.
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.17%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.15%)
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.25%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.7%)
SPY 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.18%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.39%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1QQQI closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPY's edge.
- 2QQQI's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3SPY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
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.
Technicals
SPY has the stronger structure| Metric | QQQI | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38.2 | 46.9 |
| ADX (14) | 15.6 | 13.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.1% | 1.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.1% | 8.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 11.4% | 8.3% |
Risk
SPY is the more resilient| Metric | QQQI | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.18 | 1 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.06 | 1.19 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.09 | 1.69 |
| Max drawdown | -13.7% | -9.1% |
| Current drawdown | -5.3% | -0.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 16.9% | 12.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, QQQI or SPY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SPY is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 64 against QQQI's 51. The edge comes from quality and momentum. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is QQQI or SPY the better buy right now?
SPY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor SPY over QQQI?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. SPY leads Quality by 19 points; SPY leads Momentum by 18 points; SPY leads Value by 7 points. SPY leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by QQQI simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which is better value, QQQI or SPY?
SPY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SPY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, QQQI or SPY?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, QQQI or SPY?
SPY on the Momentum factor, by 18 points. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, QQQI or SPY?
SPY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPY on Risk Resilience, by 6 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is QQQI more profitable than SPY?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is SPY's lead over QQQI getting stronger or weaker?
SPY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the QQQI vs SPY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: QQQI closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPY's edge; QQQI's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; SPY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about QQQI and SPY?
QQQI: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. SPY: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on QQQI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SPY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare QQQI and SPY with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.