CFA vs QQQ
VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. CFA offers more diversification with 502 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CFA | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $553M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.21% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 502 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +11.99% | +16.19% | |
| 1Y Return | +14.12% | +25.22% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.43% | +25.47% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.90% | +14.34% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -37.9% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Victory Capital Management Inc. | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jul 1, 2014 | Mar 10, 1999 |
CFA vs QQQ Performance
VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF (CFA) is a ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc. and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year CFA returned +14.12% while QQQ returned +25.22%. Year to date, CFA is up 11.99% versus a gain of 16.19% for QQQ.
Over three years, CFA compounded at +14.43% per year against +25.47% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +7.90% and +14.34% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.01% annualized vs +9.86%. 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 14.9% for CFA. 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 -37.9% for CFA 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 0.77. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CFA charges 0.35% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $18 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CFA currently yields 1.21% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
CFA and QQQ share 80 holdings out of 522 unique holdings combined, representing a 15.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CFA or QQQ?
CFA has an expense ratio of 0.35% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $17 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CFA or QQQ?
Over the past year CFA returned +14.12% vs +25.22% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), CFA annualized +9.86% vs +13.01% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CFA or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 14.9% for CFA. Worst drawdown: CFA -37.9% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both CFA and QQQ?
CFA and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.77, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CFA and QQQ?
CFA and QQQ share 80 common holdings with a 15.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 522 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CFA or QQQ?
CFA yields 1.21% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so CFA 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.