BTAL vs QQQ
AGF US Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, BTAL or QQQ?
Opposite sides of the same exposure.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two move opposite each other, correlation -0.61, so holding both offsets the exposure while paying both fees.
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 | BTAL | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.40% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $304M | $486.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.92% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 402 | 107 |
| YTD Return | -14.09% | +17.54%Best |
| 1Y Return | -23.29% | +25.59%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -10.12% | +24.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -4.33% | +14.18%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.8%Best | 17.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -52.7% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $8,015 | $19,407Best |
| Fund Family | AGFiQ | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 13, 2011 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 13, 2011 to Sep 4, 2026 (15 years).
BTAL 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
BTAL vs QQQ Performance
AGF US Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund ETF (BTAL) is an ETF from AGFiQ and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year BTAL returned -23.29% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, BTAL is down 14.09% versus a gain of 17.54% for QQQ.
Over three years, BTAL compounded at -10.12% per year against +24.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are -4.33% and +14.18% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +19.04% annualized vs -3.66%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.5% compared with 14.8% for BTAL. 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 -52.7% for BTAL 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 -0.61. They move opposite each other. Holding both offsets the exposure rather than spreading it, while paying both funds' fees.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BTAL charges 1.40% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $140 vs $18 annually, a gap of $122 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BTAL currently yields 2.92% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
At least 39.1% of QQQ's money is in holdings BTAL also owns.
Stated as a floor: for BTAL, our book for it covers 78.5% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
They hold the same names on opposite sides, so owning both offsets the exposure rather than doubling it.
42 positions in common, counted across the 399 positions we hold weights for in BTAL and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 402 and 107.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in BTAL | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | -0.31% | 4.67% | 4.98% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | -0.49% | 4.43% | 4.92% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | -0.33% | 3.16% | 3.49% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.38% | 2.10% | 1.72% |
| METAMeta Platform Inc | -0.30% | 2.78% | 3.08% |
| TSLATesla Motors Inc | -0.27% | 2.56% | 2.83% |
| INTCIntel Corporation | -0.28% | 2.23% | 2.51% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 0.30% | 1.37% | 1.07% |
| AMGNAmgen Inc. | 0.43% | 0.97% | 0.54% |
| LINLinde Plc Ordinary Shares | 0.34% | 1.00% | 0.66% |
39.1% of QQQ is already inside BTAL.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BTAL or QQQ?
BTAL has an expense ratio of 1.40% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $122 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BTAL or QQQ?
Over the past year BTAL returned -23.29% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), BTAL annualized -3.66% vs +19.04% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BTAL or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.5% annualized versus 14.8% for BTAL. Worst drawdown: BTAL -52.7% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both BTAL and QQQ?
BTAL and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of -0.61, so they move opposite each other. Holding both offsets the exposure rather than spreading it, and pays both funds' fees on the way. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between BTAL and QQQ?
At least 39.1% of QQQ's money is in holdings BTAL also owns. Our book for BTAL is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 42 positions in common, counted across the 399 positions we hold weights for in BTAL and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, BTAL or QQQ?
BTAL yields 2.92% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so BTAL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than BTAL?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two move opposite each other, correlation -0.61, so holding both offsets the exposure while paying both fees. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.