CPII vs QQQ
American Beacon Ionic Inflation Protection ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, CPII or QQQ?
Inflation Protection against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | CPII | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.70% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $12M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 5.10% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 16 | 107 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.0%Best | 19.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -6.4%Best | -22.8% |
| $10,000 over 2.8 years | $11,068 | $16,356Best |
| Top 10 Weight | - | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | American Beacon Funds | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | Inflation Protection | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 28, 2022 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized).
The two price series end 524 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. CPII has data through Apr 11, 2025 and QQQ through Sep 17, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 29, 2022 to Apr 11, 2025 (2.8 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.9% compared with 5.0% for CPII. 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 -6.4% for CPII 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 -0.21. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CPII 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, CPII currently yields 5.10% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 8 holdings in CPII and 102 in QQQ, totalling 97.8% and 99.9% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 8 positions we hold weights for in CPII and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 16 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 96 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for CPII (97.5% of the fund), and 8 for CPII that do not appear in QQQ (97.8%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CPII and QQQ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CPII or QQQ?
CPII 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.
Which is riskier, CPII or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.9% annualized versus 5.0% for CPII. Worst drawdown: CPII -6.4% vs QQQ -22.8%.
Should I hold both CPII and QQQ?
CPII and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of -0.21, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, CPII or QQQ?
CPII yields 5.10% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so CPII currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than CPII?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.