QQQI vs SPYI: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
QQQI and SPYI are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. QQQI is NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF, while SPYI is Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF. SPYI is broader by holdings count, with 508 positions versus 105 for QQQI. QQQI is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has SPYI ahead on AIQ Score, 49 versus 47.
What is the main difference between QQQI and SPYI?
QQQI puts 61% of its assets in Technology, while SPYI spreads across 11 sectors with none above 39%.
| Metric | QQQI | SPYI |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.68% | 0.68% |
| Holdings | 105 | 508 |
| Top-10 concentration | 46.5% | 38% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 14.51% | 12.01% |
| Average volume | 4,988,819 | 2,696,728 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | -4.5% | +0.2% |
| YTD return | -2.4% | +0.2% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 17.2% | 11.1% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -13.7% | -10.1% |
| Beta | 1.20 | 0.81 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.30 | -0.19 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.43 | -0.26 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 47/100 | 49/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 3/10 | 4/10 |
| Momentum | 24/100 | 25/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 78/100 | 80/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF vs Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF
SPYI leads
SPYI leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Value, having only recently taken the lead back from QQQI.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support SPYI, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPYI over QQQI, 49 versus 47 as of Oct 24, 2026. SPYI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value. SPYI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPYI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. SPYI lead: Reversed — QQQI led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SPYI now leads by 2.
Compare NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF and Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
QQQI vs SPYI: 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 | QQQI | SPYI | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.68% | 0.68% | Similar |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 105 | 508 | SPYI |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 46.5% | 38% | SPYI |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 14.51% | 12.01% | QQQI |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -13.7% | -10.1% | SPYI |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 17.2% | 11.1% | SPYI |
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 QQQI and SPYI 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.
- Value33 vs 41SPYI +8
- Quality65 vs 62Even
- Risk Resilience78 vs 80Even
- Momentum24 vs 25Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor SPYI. SPYI’s edge is concentrated in value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-23, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-22.
Largest factor move: Value +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -14
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
SPYI's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — QQQI and SPYI both carry a full feed there.
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 | SPYI | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.68% | 0.68% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 105 | 508 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 4,988,819 | 2,696,728 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 17.2% | 11.1% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -13.7% | -10.1% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.30 | -0.19 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.20 | 0.81 | 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
QQQI and SPYI share 53.89% of their weighted exposure across 87 common holdings.
17 holdings are unique to QQQI, and 420 holdings are unique to SPYI. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
QQQI is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 46.49% of the fund, against 37.98% for SPYI (105 holdings vs 508). 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 | QQQI | SPYI | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 8.34% | 8.02% | 8.02% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 7.62% | 7.27% | 7.27% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.81% | 5.57% | 5.57% |
| AMZNAmazon.com Inc | 4.36% | 3.81% | 3.81% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 3.11% | 2.96% | 2.96% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.71% | 2.6% | 2.6% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.89% | 2.41% | 2.41% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.03% | 2.14% | 2.14% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What QQQI adds that SPYI doesn’t
| Holding | QQQI | SPYI |
|---|---|---|
| MUMicron Technology Inc | 4.78% | 1.65% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.67% | 1.28% |
| INTCIntel Corp | 2.29% | 0.76% |
| WMTWalmart Inc | 2.27% | 0.71% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc | 1.95% | 0.68% |
| COSTCostco Wholesale Corp | 1.74% | 0.61% |
What SPYI adds that QQQI doesn’t
| Holding | SPYI | QQQI |
|---|---|---|
| JPMJPMORGAN CHASE & CO. | 1.42% | Not held |
| BRK/BBerkshire Hathaway Inc | 1.41% | Not held |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co | 1.35% | Not held |
| XOMExxonMobil Holdings Corp | 1.03% | Not held |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 0.96% | Not held |
| VVisa Inc | 0.92% | 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.
QQQI vs SPYI: five-year payout growth
QQQI began paying distributions in 2024, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare. SPYI began paying distributions in 2022, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.
| Dividend metric | QQQI | SPYI |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $7.443 | $6.146 |
| Peer rank | not ranked | not ranked |
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
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPYI. 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 | 47 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | SPYI | Value 33 vs 41 |
| Technicals | SPYI | Price vs 50-day -4.1% vs -1.7%; vs 200-day -3% vs -0.1% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 78 vs 80 |
| 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 SPYI 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 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 SPYI.
How the comparison changed
48 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 23SPYI lead: Reversed — QQQI led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SPYI now leads by 2.
- Today
- SPYI +2
- 47 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- SPYI +8
- 51 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- QQQI +3
- 61 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Oct 6 when SPYI moved ahead of QQQI.
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.
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only QQQI
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SPYI
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.9%)
Both carry 6 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, BB Lower Band Breach, Keltner Channel Breakdown, MACD Bearish Crossover.
SPYI 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price 0%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.44%, AIQ -3 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 Value gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPYI's edge.
- 2QQQI's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3SPYI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, 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.
Performance
SPYI leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | QQQI | SPYI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.9% | -1.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.7% | -1.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0% | 0.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -2.5% | 0.8% |
| Year to date | -2.4% | 0.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -4.5% | 0.2% |
Technicals
SPYI has the stronger structure| Metric | QQQI | SPYI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 23 | 30.5 |
| ADX (14) | 26.9 | 19.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.1% | -1.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3% | -0.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.4% | 7.7% |
Risk
Split| Metric | QQQI | SPYI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.2 | 0.81 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.3 | -0.19 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.43 | -0.26 |
| Max drawdown | -13.7% | -10.1% |
| Current drawdown | -8.8% | -3.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.2% | 11.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -1.3% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between QQQI and SPYI?
QQQI puts 61% of its assets in Technology, while SPYI spreads across 11 sectors with none above 39%.
How much do QQQI and SPYI overlap?
QQQI and SPYI share 53.89% of their weighted exposure across 87 common holdings. 17 holdings are unique to QQQI, and 420 holdings are unique to SPYI. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
Which ETF is more diversified, QQQI or SPYI?
SPYI holds more positions: 508 versus 105 for QQQI.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
Neither: both charge 0.68% a year.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
QQQI, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 14.51% against 12.01% for SPYI.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
QQQI has been more volatile over the past year, at 17.2% annualized against 11.1% for SPYI.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
SPYI fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -10.1% against -13.7% for QQQI.
Compare QQQI and SPYI 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.