BNDW vs QQQ
Vanguard Total World Bond ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
BNDW has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 108 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BNDW | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.05% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $1.9B | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.25% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 4 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +0.15% | +16.23% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.74% | +26.23% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.54% | +25.75% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.19% | +14.78% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.0% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -17.7% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 4, 2018 | Mar 10, 1999 |
BNDW vs QQQ Performance
Vanguard Total World Bond ETF (BNDW) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year BNDW returned +1.74% while QQQ returned +26.23%. Year to date, BNDW is up 0.15% versus a gain of 16.23% for QQQ.
Over three years, BNDW compounded at +4.54% per year against +25.75% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are -0.19% and +14.78% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.02% annualized vs +0.91%. 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 5.0% for BNDW. 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 -17.7% for BNDW 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 0.52. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BNDW charges 0.05% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $5 vs $18 annually, a gap of $13 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BNDW currently yields 4.25% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
BNDW and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 105 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, BNDW or QQQ?
BNDW has an expense ratio of 0.05% while QQQ charges 0.18%. BNDW is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $13 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BNDW or QQQ?
Over the past year BNDW returned +1.74% vs +26.23% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), BNDW annualized +0.91% vs +13.02% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BNDW or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 5.0% for BNDW. Worst drawdown: BNDW -17.7% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both BNDW and QQQ?
BNDW and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.52, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BNDW and QQQ?
BNDW and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 105 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BNDW or QQQ?
BNDW yields 4.25% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so BNDW 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.