XLK vs ARKK ETF Comparison
Compare XLK and ARKK across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between XLK and ARKK?
XLK is State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF, while ARKK is ARK Innovation ETF. XLK is tied to Equity; ARKK is tied to Equity. XLK is broader by holdings count, with 43 positions versus 12 for ARKK. XLK is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | XLK | ARKK | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.08% | 0.75% | Fund |
| Holdings | 43 | 12 | Fund |
| Top-10 concentration | 43.5% | 22% | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | Equity | Equity | Fund |
| Annualized volatility | 26.3% | 37.6% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -16.1% | -31.4% | Risk |
| Beta | 1.75 | 2.26 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.30 | 0.39 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | 2.01 | 0.66 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 55/100 | 46/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 7/10 | 3/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 50/100 | 63/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 61/100 | 21/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF vs ARK Innovation ETF
XLK leads
XLK leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value.
Fragile: 3 of 4 evidence groups support XLK, and its current signal state is conflicted.
State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF
ARK Innovation ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors XLK over ARKK, 55 versus 46 as of Sep 4, 2026. XLK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while ARKK holds the stronger momentum profile. XLK also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor XLK today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. XLK lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF and ARK Innovation ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
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%61 vs 21XLK +40
- Momentum25%50 vs 63ARKK +13
- Value30%37 vs 25XLK +12
- Quality30%74 vs 64XLK +10
3 of 4 evidence groups favor XLK. XLK’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; ARKK keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-02, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-01.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
XLK's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — XLK and ARKK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
XLK (State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
ARKK (ARK Innovation ETF): the counter-case, on momentum — but at materially higher volatility, 39.6% against 20.9%.
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
XLKXLK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
XLKXLK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
ARKKARKK on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
XLKXLK on Risk Resilience, by 40 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 | XLK | ARKK | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.08% | 0.75% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $119.6B | $5.6B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 73 | 10 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 6,005,380 | 8,768,519 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 26.3% | 37.6% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -16.1% | -31.4% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.30 | 0.39 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.75 | 2.26 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
XLK and ARKK share 2.91% of their weighted exposure across 2 common holdings.
XLK is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 43.53% of the fund, against 22.03% for ARKK (43 holdings vs 12). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
41 holdings are unique to XLK and 10 to ARKK. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | XLK | ARKK | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMDADVANCED MICRO DEVICES | 3.88% | 2.55% | 2.55% |
| TERTERADYNE INC | 0.36% | 0.9% | 0.36% |
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, XLK or ARKK?
XLK currently has more reported holdings, with 43 positions versus 12.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
XLK 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?
ARKK has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
XLK has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
XLK currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 55 to 46.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor XLK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | XLK | 55 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | XLK | Value 37 vs 25 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 1.9% vs 9.8%; vs 200-day 14.8% vs 8.6% |
| Risk Resilience | XLK | Risk Resilience 61 vs 21 |
| 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 XLK and ARKK 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 moderate at 9 points.
- 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 XLK.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 21 – Sep 2XLK lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- XLK +9
- 55 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- XLK +9
- 56 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- XLK +10
- 58 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- XLK +2
- 49 vs 47
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jul 8 when XLK moved ahead of ARKK.
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, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (14.12%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
3 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.30%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
XLK 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.29%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +4.5%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1ARKK closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to XLK's edge.
- 2ARKK's Beta Spike Warning resolves — a bearish risk rule currently active against it.
- 3XLK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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
Split| Metric | XLK | ARKK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.7 | 51.6 |
| ADX (14) | 12 | 24.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.9% | 9.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 14.8% | 8.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.9% | 39.6% |
Risk
XLK is the more resilient| Metric | XLK | ARKK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.75 | 2.26 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.3 | 0.39 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.01 | 0.66 |
| Max drawdown | -16.1% | -31.4% |
| Current drawdown | -7.4% | -9.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.3% | 37.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -3.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, XLK or ARKK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, XLK is the stronger of the two as of Sep 4, 2026, scoring 55 against ARKK's 46. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. ARKK is not without a case — it holds the better momentum profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. 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 XLK or ARKK the better buy right now?
XLK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 4, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor XLK over ARKK?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. XLK leads Risk Resilience by 40 points; ARKK leads Momentum by 13 points; XLK leads Value by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, XLK or ARKK?
XLK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. XLK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 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, XLK or ARKK?
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, XLK or ARKK?
ARKK on the Momentum factor, by 13 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, XLK or ARKK?
XLK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. XLK on Risk Resilience, by 40 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 XLK more profitable than ARKK?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is XLK's lead over ARKK getting stronger or weaker?
XLK lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-21 and 2026-09-02. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-08, when XLK moved ahead of ARKK.
What would change the XLK vs ARKK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ARKK closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to XLK's edge; ARKK's Beta Spike Warning resolves — a bearish risk rule currently active against it; XLK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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 XLK and ARKK?
XLK: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. ARKK: 3 bullish / 2 bearish, 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 XLK is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ARKK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare XLK and ARKK 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.