BMN vs QQQ
BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust 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 103 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BMN | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.17% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $156M | $455.8B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.32% | 0.41% | |
| Holdings | 170 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | -0.29% | +17.46% | |
| 1Y Return | +9.34% | +26.02% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.14% | +25.51% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.12% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.5% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -13.0% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 26, 2022 | Mar 10, 1999 |
BMN vs QQQ Performance
BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN) is a ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year BMN returned +9.34% while QQQ returned +26.02%. Year to date, BMN is down 0.29% versus a gain of 17.46% for QQQ.
Over three years, BMN compounded at +5.14% per year against +25.51% for QQQ. Across the full 4-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.08% annualized vs +4.55%. 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 9.5% for BMN. 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 -13.0% for BMN 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 0.47. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BMN charges 2.17% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $217 vs $18 annually, a gap of $199 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BMN currently yields 4.32% against 0.41% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
BMN and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 166 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, BMN or QQQ?
BMN has an expense ratio of 2.17% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $199 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BMN or QQQ?
Over the past year BMN returned +9.34% vs +26.02% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), BMN annualized +4.55% vs +13.08% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BMN or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 9.5% for BMN. Worst drawdown: BMN -13.0% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both BMN and QQQ?
BMN and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.47, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BMN and QQQ?
BMN and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 166 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BMN or QQQ?
BMN yields 4.32% while QQQ yields 0.41%, so BMN 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.