BATT vs QQQ
Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. BATT delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 108 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BATT | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $124M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.77% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 54 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +9.43% | +16.23% | |
| 1Y Return | +48.99% | +26.23% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.89% | +25.75% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.37% | +14.78% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 30.6% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -69.4% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Amplify ETFs | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 4, 2018 | Mar 10, 1999 |
BATT vs QQQ Performance
Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) is a ETF from Amplify ETFs and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year BATT returned +48.99% while QQQ returned +26.23%. Year to date, BATT is up 9.43% versus a gain of 16.23% for QQQ.
Over three years, BATT compounded at +10.89% per year against +25.75% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +0.37% and +14.78% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.02% annualized vs -1.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BATT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 30.6% for QQQ. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -69.4% for BATT and -83.0% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.65. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BATT charges 0.59% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $18 annually, a gap of $41 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BATT currently yields 1.77% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
BATT and QQQ share 1 holdings out of 153 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in BATT | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TSLA | 5.84% | 2.56% | 3.28% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BATT or QQQ?
BATT has an expense ratio of 0.59% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $41 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BATT or QQQ?
Over the past year BATT returned +48.99% vs +26.23% for QQQ, so BATT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), BATT annualized -1.45% vs +13.02% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BATT or QQQ?
BATT has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 30.6% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: BATT -69.4% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both BATT and QQQ?
BATT and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.65, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BATT and QQQ?
BATT and QQQ share 1 common holdings with a 2.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 153 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BATT or QQQ?
BATT yields 1.77% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so BATT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.