BCIM vs QQQ
abrdn Bloomberg Industrial Metals Strategy K-1 Free ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 108 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BCIM | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.40% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $26M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 10.36% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 27 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +7.79% | +17.07% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.99% | +26.39% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -0.31% | +26.08% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.18% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.4% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -43.4% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Aberdeen | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 21, 2021 | Mar 10, 1999 |
BCIM vs QQQ Performance
abrdn Bloomberg Industrial Metals Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCIM) is a ETF from Aberdeen and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year BCIM returned +2.99% while QQQ returned +26.39%. Year to date, BCIM is up 7.79% versus a gain of 17.07% for QQQ.
Over three years, BCIM compounded at -0.31% per year against +26.08% for QQQ. Across the full 4-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.05% annualized vs +0.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 20.4% for BCIM. 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 -43.4% for BCIM 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 0.27. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BCIM charges 0.40% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $40 vs $18 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BCIM currently yields 10.36% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
BCIM and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 115 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BCIM or QQQ?
BCIM has an expense ratio of 0.40% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $22 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BCIM or QQQ?
Over the past year BCIM returned +2.99% vs +26.39% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), BCIM annualized +0.07% vs +13.05% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BCIM or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 20.4% for BCIM. Worst drawdown: BCIM -43.4% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both BCIM and QQQ?
BCIM and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.27, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BCIM and QQQ?
BCIM and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 115 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BCIM or QQQ?
BCIM yields 10.36% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so BCIM 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.