QQQ vs VTEB: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

QQQ and VTEB are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. QQQ is Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1, while VTEB is Vanguard Tax-Exempt Bond ETF. VTEB is broader by holdings count, with 10,660 positions versus 107 for QQQ. QQQ is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VTEB ahead on AIQ Score, 60 versus 51.

Market data as of Oct 22, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 22, 2026
QQQ
Invesco
vs
VTEB
Vanguard
QQQ
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Issuer
Invesco
Inception
1999-03-10
VTEB
Vanguard Tax-Exempt Bond ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2015-08-21

What is the main difference between QQQ and VTEB?

VTEB holds 10,660 positions to QQQ's 107, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
QQQ
0.18%
VTEB
0.03%
Lower annual fund costVTEB
Holdings
QQQ
107
VTEB
10,660
Broader reported basketVTEB
1Y return
QQQ
+19.6%
VTEB
-5%
Trailing performanceQQQ
Annualized volatility
QQQ
19.9%
VTEB
3.6%
Lower realized volatilityVTEB
MetricQQQVTEB
Fund
Expense ratio0.18%0.03%
Holdings10710,660
Top-10 concentration47%1.4%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months0.43%3.54%
Average volume37,509,60315,977,970
Performance
1Y return+19.6%-5%
YTD return+16.8%-4.6%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+14.4%+0.3%
Risk
Annualized volatility19.9%3.6%
Max drawdown (1Y)-12.2%-8.2%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-35.1%-12.3%
Beta1.450.09
Sharpe ratio0.77-2.51
Sortino ratio1.20-3.08
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score51/10060/100
AIQ Edge Score4/108/10
Momentum21/10056/100
Risk Resilience72/10090/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Vanguard Tax-Exempt Bond ETF

Data as of Oct 22, 2026· market close· Coverage 64/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 4/10

VTEB leads

VTEB leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from QQQ.

Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support VTEB, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 4Comparison trend: Reversed
QQQ

Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1

AIQ Score
51/100
AIQ Edge Score
4/10
VTEB

Vanguard Tax-Exempt Bond ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
60/100
AIQ Edge Score
8/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VTEB over QQQ, 60 versus 51 as of Oct 22, 2026. VTEB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while QQQ holds the stronger quality profile. VTEB also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VTEB today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. VTEB lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VTEB now leads by 9.

Compare Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 and Vanguard Tax-Exempt Bond ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

QQQ vs VTEB: 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 wantQQQVTEBFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.18%0.03%VTEB
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings10710,660VTEB
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings47%1.4%VTEB
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield0.43%3.54%VTEB
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-35.1%-12.3%VTEB
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year19.9%3.6%VTEB

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.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

QQQ
+95.6%
VTEB
+1.5%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

QQQ $19,562 · VTEB $10,152

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 VTEB against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

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.

QQQ advantage
0
VTEB advantage
  • Momentum21 vs 56
    VTEB +35
  • Risk Resilience72 vs 90
    VTEB +18
  • Quality82 vs 74
    QQQ +8
  • Value35 vs 36
    Even

2 of 4 evidence groups favor VTEB. VTEB’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; QQQ keeps a meaningful quality edge.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.

QQQ-1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -2

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.

VTEB-1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -3

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.

VTEB's lead was unchanged in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — QQQ and VTEB both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

VTEB (Vanguard Tax-Exempt Bond ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.

QQQ (Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1): the counter-case, on quality, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 15.4% against 7.3%.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasureQQQVTEBWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.18%0.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings10710,660More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume37,509,60315,977,970Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility19.9%3.6%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-12.2%-8.2%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio0.77-2.51Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta1.450.09Sensitivity 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.

Cash & Others0.1% vs 1.6%
Technology58.8% vs 0.0%
Communication Services12.1% vs 0.0%
Consumer Cyclical10.2% vs 0.0%
Consumer Defensive6.2% vs 0.0%
Industrials5.5% vs 0.0%
Healthcare4.3% vs 0.0%
Utilities1.1% vs 0.0%
QQQVTEB

How much of the same holdings they own

QQQ and VTEB share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.

102 holdings are unique to QQQ, and 10,659 holdings are unique to VTEB. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

QQQ is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 46.96% of the fund, against 1.36% for VTEB (107 holdings vs 10,660). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.

What QQQ adds that VTEB doesn’t

HoldingQQQVTEB
NVDANVIDIA Corp8.49%Not held
AAPLApple Inc7.71%Not held
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.88%Not held
MUMicron Technology Inc4.89%Not held
AMZNAmazon.com Inc4.36%Not held
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc3.64%Not held

What VTEB adds that QQQ doesn’t

HoldingVTEBQQQ
Vanguard Municipal Low Duration Fund 12/31/20490.5%Not held
City of New York NY 5.00% 08/01/20340.12%Not held
University of California 5.00% 05/15/20360.11%Not held
State of Idaho 4.00% 06/30/20270.1%Not held
State of California 5.25% 08/01/20320.1%Not held
State of Maryland 5.00% 06/01/20380.09%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.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VTEB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreVTEB51 vs 60
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationEvenValue 35 vs 36
TechnicalsQQQPrice vs 50-day -0.2% vs -0.9%; vs 200-day 6.2% vs -3.7%
Risk ResilienceVTEBRisk Resilience 72 vs 90
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of QQQ and VTEB and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.

  • The AIQ gap is moderate at 9 points.
  • 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 lead has swung materially session to session. (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 VTEB.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20

VTEB lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VTEB now leads by 9.

Jun 21QQQ leads above the line · VTEB leads belowOct 20
Today
VTEB +9
51 vs 60
7 sessions ago
VTEB +2
57 vs 59
30 sessions ago
QQQ +12
65 vs 53
90 sessions ago
QQQ +12
67 vs 55

The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 15 when VTEB 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.

QQQConflicted

1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted

Only QQQ

  • Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.50%)
  • Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
VTEBConflicted

1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only VTEB

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.88%)
  • ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.55%)
  • 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.3%)
  • Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon

VTEB 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.

QQQDivergence

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).

VTEBNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.08%, 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.

  1. 1QQQ closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to VTEB's edge.
  2. 2QQQ's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
  3. 3VTEB's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once.
  4. 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

QQQ leads 4 of 6 windows
MetricQQQVTEB
1 week (5 sessions)-3.5%0.7%
1 month (20 sessions)-4%-0.5%
3 months (63 sessions)1.7%-3.7%
6 months (126 sessions)11.4%-4.8%
Year to date16.8%-4.6%
1 year (252 sessions)19.6%-5%

Technicals

QQQ has the stronger structure
MetricQQQVTEB
RSI (14)37.266.7
ADX (14)20.335
Price vs 50-day-0.2%-0.9%
Price vs 200-day6.2%-3.7%
Volatility (1M, annualized)15.4%7.3%

Risk

VTEB is the more resilient
MetricQQQVTEB
Beta1.450.09
Sharpe ratio0.77-2.51
Sortino ratio1.2-3.08
Max drawdown-12.2%-8.2%
Current drawdown-5.5%-6.2%
Annualized volatility19.9%3.6%
Value at risk (95%)-1.9%-0.5%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between QQQ and VTEB?

VTEB holds 10,660 positions to QQQ's 107, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do QQQ and VTEB overlap?

QQQ and VTEB share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 102 holdings are unique to QQQ, and 10,659 holdings are unique to VTEB. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, QQQ or VTEB?

VTEB holds more positions: 10,660 versus 107 for QQQ.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VTEB has the lower expense ratio, 0.03% a year against 0.18% for QQQ.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

VTEB, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 3.54% against 0.43% for QQQ.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

QQQ has been more volatile over the past year, at 19.9% annualized against 3.6% for VTEB.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

VTEB fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -12.3% against -35.1% for QQQ.

Compare QQQ and VTEB 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.