QQQ vs SPLV ETF Comparison
Compare QQQ and SPLV across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between QQQ and SPLV?
QQQ is Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1, while SPLV is Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF. QQQ is tied to Equity; SPLV is tied to Equity. QQQ is broader by holdings count, with 102 positions versus 101 for SPLV. QQQ is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | QQQ | SPLV | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.25% | Fund |
| Assets under management | $489.6B | $7.2B | Fund |
| Holdings | 102 | 101 | Fund |
| Top-10 concentration | 76% | 24.5% | Fund |
| Average volume | 48,821,168 | 2,845,952 | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | Equity | Equity | Fund |
| Annualized volatility | 19.7% | 10.6% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -12.2% | -7.9% | Risk |
| Beta | 1.43 | 0.01 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.07 | -0.05 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | 1.60 | -0.09 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 58/100 | 58/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 7/10 | 7/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 51/100 | 39/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 74/100 | 67/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF
QQQ and SPLV are effectively level
QQQ and SPLV are effectively level on the AIQ Score; the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score does not currently separate QQQ and SPLV as of Sep 5, 2026. Both names are scored on the same 0–100 scale across Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
Compare Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 and Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Compare QQQ and SPLV 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%83 vs 70QQQ +13
- Momentum25%51 vs 39QQQ +12
- Risk Resilience15%74 vs 67QQQ +7
Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
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 +22
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No new signals fired.
SPLV's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — QQQ and SPLV 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
EvenNeither separates on the overall score.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
QQQQQQ on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
QQQQQQ on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 | QQQ | SPLV | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.25% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $489.6B | $7.2B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 103 | 104 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 48,821,168 | 2,845,952 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 19.7% | 10.6% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -12.2% | -7.9% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.07 | -0.05 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.43 | 0.01 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
QQQ and SPLV share 6.84% of their weighted exposure across 9 common holdings.
QQQ is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 76.03% of the fund, against 24.47% for SPLV (102 holdings vs 101). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
93 holdings are unique to QQQ and 92 to SPLV. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | QQQ | SPLV | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| PEPPepsiCo Inc | 1.68% | 1.88% | 1.68% |
| LINLinde PLC | 0.98% | 1.07% | 0.98% |
| COSTCostco Wholesale Corp | 1.8% | 0.98% | 0.98% |
| CSXCSX Corp | 0.8% | 1.71% | 0.8% |
| CTASCintas Corp | 0.71% | 1.71% | 0.71% |
| MDLZMondelez International Inc | 0.69% | 1.71% | 0.69% |
| AEPAmerican Electric Power Co Inc | 0.59% | 2.14% | 0.59% |
| XELXcel Energy Inc | 0.21% | 1.01% | 0.21% |
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, QQQ or SPLV?
QQQ currently has more reported holdings, with 102 positions versus 101.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
QQQ 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?
QQQ has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
SPLV has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
The current AlgovestIQ evidence does not show a clear leader.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
How each independent group of evidence reads the pair.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 58 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | QQQ | Price vs 50-day 1.1% vs -1.6%; vs 200-day 9.2% vs 1.6% |
| Risk Resilience | QQQ | Risk Resilience 74 vs 67 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 0 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 4 of 3 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3QQQ lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 0 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- Level
- 58 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 59 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- QQQ +1
- 65 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- SPLV +10
- 58 vs 68
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 1 when SPLV moved ahead of QQQ.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.20%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.61%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.96%)
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 +5 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.66%, AIQ +2 points).
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
QQQ has the stronger structure| Metric | QQQ | SPLV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.3 | 38.8 |
| ADX (14) | 11.2 | 10.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.1% | -1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 9.2% | 1.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13.5% | 8.2% |
Risk
QQQ is the more resilient| Metric | QQQ | SPLV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.43 | 0.01 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.07 | -0.05 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.6 | -0.09 |
| Max drawdown | -12.2% | -7.9% |
| Current drawdown | -3.8% | -3.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 19.7% | 10.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.9% | -1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better value, QQQ or SPLV?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, QQQ or SPLV?
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, QQQ or SPLV?
QQQ on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, QQQ or SPLV?
QQQ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. QQQ on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 QQQ more profitable than SPLV?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
What do the current signals say about QQQ and SPLV?
QQQ: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. SPLV: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 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 QQQ is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SPLV it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare QQQ and SPLV 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.