VTI vs QQQM ETF Comparison
Compare VTI and QQQM across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between VTI and QQQM?
VTI is Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF, while QQQM is Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF. VTI is tied to Large Cap Equity; QQQM is tied to Equity. VTI is broader by holdings count, with 3,482 positions versus 103 for QQQM. QQQM is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | VTI | QQQM | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.15% | Fund |
| Assets under management | $2.30T | $104.7B | Fund |
| Holdings | 3,482 | 103 | Fund |
| Top-10 concentration | 51.4% | 76% | Fund |
| Average volume | 4,488,042 | 3,073,400 | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | Large Cap Equity | Equity | Fund |
| 1Y return | +20.6% | +26.9% | Performance |
| YTD return | +13.6% | +16.8% | Performance |
| Annualized volatility | 13.1% | 19.6% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -9.2% | -12.2% | Risk |
| Beta | 1.02 | 1.42 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.17 | 1.08 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | 1.68 | 1.61 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 60/100 | 54/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 8/10 | 6/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 55/100 | 53/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 88/100 | 74/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF vs Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
VTI leads
VTI leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value.
Competitive: 3 of 4 evidence groups support VTI, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VTI over QQQM, 60 versus 54 as of Sep 5, 2026. VTI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value. VTI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VTI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. VTI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Compare VTI 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.
- Risk Resilience15%88 vs 74VTI +14
- Value30%37 vs 31VTI +6
- Quality30%74 vs 69VTI +5
- Momentum25%55 vs 53Even
3 of 4 evidence groups favor VTI. VTI’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Value -1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Value -1
No new signals fired.
VTI's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — VTI and QQQM 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
VTIVTI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
VTIVTI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
VTIVTI on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 | VTI | QQQM | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.15% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $2.30T | $104.7B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 3,598 | 104 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 4,488,042 | 3,073,400 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 13.1% | 19.6% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -9.2% | -12.2% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.17 | 1.08 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.02 | 1.42 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
VTI and QQQM share 72.41% of their weighted exposure across 92 common holdings.
QQQM is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 75.96% of the fund, against 51.44% for VTI (103 holdings vs 3482). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
3390 holdings are unique to VTI and 11 to QQQM. Owning both adds little diversification — they are largely the same exposure in different wrappers.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | VTI | QQQM | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple Inc | 12.58% | 15.3% | 12.58% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 9.57% | 12.03% | 9.57% |
| AMZNAmazon.com Inc | 7.29% | 8.84% | 7.29% |
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 6.4% | 8.77% | 6.4% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 2.9% | 3.17% | 2.9% |
| MUMicron Technology Inc | 2.57% | 9.47% | 2.57% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.56% | 2.69% | 2.56% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.31% | 2.94% | 2.31% |
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, VTI or QQQM?
VTI currently has more reported holdings, with 3,482 positions versus 103.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
VTI 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?
QQQM has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
VTI has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
VTI currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 60 to 54.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VTI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | VTI | 60 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | VTI | Value 37 vs 31 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 1.7% vs 1.1%; vs 200-day 8.5% vs 9.2% |
| Risk Resilience | VTI | Risk Resilience 88 vs 74 |
| 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 VTI and QQQM and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 6 points.
- 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 VTI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4VTI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VTI +6
- 60 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- VTI +5
- 60 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- VTI +5
- 66 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- VTI +9
- 64 vs 55
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.40%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.0%)
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.21%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
VTI 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 down over the latest session (price -0.32%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.19%, 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 Risk Resilience gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to VTI's edge.
- 2QQQM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3VTI'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.
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | VTI | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.1% | -0.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.5% | 0.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2% | -3.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 13.4% | 17.9% |
| Year to date | 13.6% | 16.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 20.6% | 26.9% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | VTI | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44.5 | 40.3 |
| ADX (14) | 13.3 | 11.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.7% | 1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8.5% | 9.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 8.8% | 13.5% |
Risk
VTI is the more resilient| Metric | VTI | QQQM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.02 | 1.42 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.17 | 1.08 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.68 | 1.61 |
| Max drawdown | -9.2% | -12.2% |
| Current drawdown | -0.9% | -3.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 13.1% | 19.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.4% | -1.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, VTI or QQQM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, VTI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 60 against QQQM's 54. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. 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 VTI or QQQM the better buy right now?
VTI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor VTI over QQQM?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. VTI leads Risk Resilience by 14 points; VTI leads Value by 6 points; VTI leads Quality by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, VTI or QQQM?
VTI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. VTI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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, VTI or QQQM?
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, VTI or QQQM?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, VTI or QQQM?
VTI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. VTI on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 VTI more profitable than QQQM?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is VTI's lead over QQQM getting stronger or weaker?
VTI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the VTI vs QQQM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: QQQM closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to VTI's edge; QQQM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; VTI'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 VTI and QQQM?
VTI: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. QQQM: 3 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 VTI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On QQQM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare VTI and QQQM 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.