BITO vs QQQ
ProShares Bitcoin ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, BITO or QQQ?
Multi Alternative against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. BITO led over 3Y, QQQ over 1Y, 5Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BITO | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.95% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $1.7B | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 38.16% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 5 | 107 |
| YTD Return | -8.16% | +21.16%Best |
| 1Y Return | -28.11% | +24.78%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +38.64%Best | +27.95% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.19% | +15.36%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 56.7% | 20.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -77.9% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $10,095 | $20,430Best |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Oct 18, 2021 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 19, 2021 to Sep 24, 2026 (4.9 years).
BITO vs QQQ growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 4.9 years both funds cover.
BITO vs QQQ Performance
ProShares Bitcoin ETF (BITO) is an ETF from ProShares and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year BITO returned -28.11% while QQQ returned +24.78%. Year to date, BITO is down 8.16% versus a gain of 21.16% for QQQ.
Over three years, BITO compounded at +38.64% per year against +27.95% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +0.19% and +15.36% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BITO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 56.7% compared with 20.8% 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 -77.9% for BITO and -35.1% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.49. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BITO charges 0.95% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $95 vs $18 annually, a gap of $77 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BITO currently yields 38.16% against 0.44% for QQQ.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BITO and QQQ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BITO or QQQ?
BITO has an expense ratio of 0.95% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $77 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BITO or QQQ?
Over the past year BITO returned -28.11% vs +24.78% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BITO or QQQ?
BITO has been the more volatile fund at 56.7% annualized versus 20.8% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: BITO -77.9% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both BITO and QQQ?
BITO and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.49, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, BITO or QQQ?
BITO yields 38.16% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so BITO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than BITO?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. BITO led over 3Y, QQQ over 1Y, 5Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.