BWQG vs QQQ

BWQG vs QQQ

Which is better, BWQG or QQQ?

QQQ costs less.

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 60.7%.

Lower Fees: QQQLess Concentrated: QQQ

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

MetricBWQGQQQ
Expense Ratio0.70%0.18%Best
AUM$34M$483.5B
Dividend Yield0.00%0.44%
Holdings79107
YTD Return+1.76%+15.21%Best
1Y Return-+19.78%
3Y Return (annualized)-+24.58%
5Y Return (annualized)-+13.93%
Top 10 Weight60.7%46.5%Best
Fund FamilyBurke Wealth Management LLCInvesco (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap GrowthLarge Cap Growth
InceptionJul 8, 2026Mar 10, 1999

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

BWQG 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.

BWQG vs QQQ Performance

BWM Quality Growth ETF (BWQG) is an ETF from Burke Wealth Management LLC and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Year to date, BWQG is up 1.76% versus a gain of 15.21% for QQQ.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

BWQG charges 0.70% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $70 vs $18 annually, a gap of $52 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BWQG currently yields 0.00% against 0.44% for QQQ.

Holdings Overlap

BWQG already in QQQ50.8%
QQQ already in BWQG29.8%

50.8% of BWQG's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 29.8% of QQQ's money is in holdings BWQG also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

10 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in BWQG and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 79 and 107.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 87 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for BWQG (68.4% of the fund), and 21 for BWQG that do not appear in QQQ (44.1%).

Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in BWQGWeight in QQQDifference
NVDANvidia Corp10.12%8.44%1.68%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.6.76%4.43%2.33%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc6.45%4.67%1.78%
METAMeta Platforms Inc5.85%2.78%3.07%
GOOGAlphabet Inc5.22%3.13%2.09%
CRWDCrowdstrike Holdings Inc3.96%0.94%3.02%
TSLATesla Inc2.32%2.56%0.24%
ASL:ASAsml Holding Nv Unsponsored Adr Ordinary Shares4.11%0.68%3.43%
ISRGIntuitive Surgical Inc.3.63%0.58%3.05%
PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc2.40%1.60%0.80%

50.8% of BWQG is already inside QQQ.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

BWQGQQQ

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, BWQG or QQQ?

BWQG has an expense ratio of 0.70% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $52 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between BWQG and QQQ?

50.8% of BWQG's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 29.8% of QQQ's is in holdings BWQG also owns. They hold 10 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in BWQG and 102 in QQQ.

Which pays a higher dividend, BWQG or QQQ?

BWQG yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is QQQ better than BWQG?

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 60.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.