CDEI vs QQQ
Calvert US Large-Cap Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Index ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, CDEI or QQQ?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
CDEI has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.8%.
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 | CDEI | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.14%Best | 0.18% |
| AUM | $19M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.95% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 234 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +13.71% | +17.95%Best |
| 1Y Return | +19.98% | +21.77%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.85% | +25.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.24% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.3%Best | 17.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -19.5%Best | -22.8% |
| $10,000 over 3.6 years | $18,836 | $24,299Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 47.8% | 46.5%Best |
| Fund Family | Calvert | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jan 30, 2023 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 1, 2023 to Sep 18, 2026 (3.6 years).
CDEI 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 3.6 years both funds cover.
CDEI vs QQQ Performance
Calvert US Large-Cap Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Index ETF (CDEI) is an ETF from Calvert and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year CDEI returned +19.98% while QQQ returned +21.77%. Year to date, CDEI is up 13.71% versus a gain of 17.95% for QQQ.
Over three years, CDEI compounded at +19.85% per year against +25.63% for QQQ. Across the full 4-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +27.97% annualized vs +19.23%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% compared with 12.3% for CDEI. 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 -19.5% for CDEI and -22.8% 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 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CDEI charges 0.14% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $14 vs $18 annually, a gap of $4 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CDEI currently yields 0.95% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
51.6% of CDEI's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 49.3% of QQQ's money is in holdings CDEI also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
40 positions in common, counted across the 231 positions we hold weights for in CDEI and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 234 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 56 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for CDEI (48.3% of the fund), and 184 for CDEI that do not appear in QQQ (47.7%).
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
| Stock | Weight in CDEI | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 9.21% | 8.44% | 0.77% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 8.56% | 7.27% | 1.29% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 7.12% | 5.76% | 1.36% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 6.72% | 3.36% | 3.36% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 2.73% | 3.45% | 0.72% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.77% | 2.10% | 0.33% |
| INTCIntel Corporation | 1.57% | 2.23% | 0.66% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp 3.125 06/15/2060 | 1.48% | 1.69% | 0.21% |
| COSTCostco Wholesale Corp. | 1.13% | 1.84% | 0.71% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 1.42% | 1.37% | 0.05% |
51.6% of CDEI 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.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CDEI or QQQ?
CDEI has an expense ratio of 0.14% while QQQ charges 0.18%. CDEI is the cheaper option, by $4 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CDEI or QQQ?
Over the past year CDEI returned +19.98% vs +21.77% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), CDEI annualized +19.23% vs +27.97% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CDEI or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 12.3% for CDEI. Worst drawdown: CDEI -19.5% vs QQQ -22.8%.
Should I hold both CDEI and QQQ?
CDEI and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CDEI and QQQ?
51.6% of CDEI's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 49.3% of QQQ's is in holdings CDEI also owns. They hold 40 positions in common, counted across the 231 positions we hold weights for in CDEI and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, CDEI or QQQ?
CDEI yields 0.95% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so CDEI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than CDEI?
CDEI has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.