DIVB vs QQQ
iShares Core Dividend ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, DIVB or QQQ?
Large Cap Value against Large Cap Growth.
DIVB has a lower expense ratio. DIVB led over 1Y, QQQ over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. DIVB is less concentrated, with 31.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%.
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 | DIVB | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.05%Best | 0.18% |
| AUM | $2.0B | $498.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.02% | 0.42% |
| Holdings | 385 | 321 |
| YTD Return | +22.33% | +22.67%Best |
| 1Y Return | +26.27%Best | +24.33% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.00% | +29.05%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.19% | +17.00%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.1%Best | 19.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -36.9% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,580 | $21,924Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 31.3%Best | 47.2% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Nov 7, 2017 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 9, 2017 to Oct 2, 2026 (8.9 years).
DIVB 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 8.9 years both funds cover.
DIVB vs QQQ Performance
iShares Core Dividend ETF (DIVB) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year DIVB returned +26.27% while QQQ returned +24.33%. Year to date, DIVB is up 22.33% versus a gain of 22.67% for QQQ.
Over three years, DIVB compounded at +24.00% per year against +29.05% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +13.19% and +17.00% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +19.95% annualized vs +13.00%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.9% compared with 17.1% for DIVB. 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 -36.9% for DIVB 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 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DIVB charges 0.05% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $5 vs $18 annually, a gap of $13 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DIVB currently yields 2.02% against 0.42% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
14.7% of DIVB's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 7.1% of QQQ's money is in holdings DIVB also owns.
DIVB and QQQ share little of their money.
17 positions in common, counted across the 382 positions we hold weights for in DIVB and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 385 and 321.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 79 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for DIVB (90.7% of the fund), and 353 for DIVB that do not appear in QQQ (84.8%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in DIVB | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADPAutomatic Data Processing, Inc. | 5.30% | 0.48% | 4.82% |
| PAYXPaychex, Inc. | 2.50% | 0.18% | 2.32% |
| PEPPepsico Inc. | 0.91% | 0.83% | 0.08% |
| TMUST-Mobile Usa Inc Esrw Usd Npv Ref Sm#585558 | 0.87% | 0.87% | 0.00% |
| AMGNAmgen Inc. | 0.71% | 0.90% | 0.19% |
| GILDGilead Sciences Inc | 0.70% | 0.79% | 0.09% |
| CMCSAComcast Corp-class A Cmcsa | 1.07% | 0.40% | 0.67% |
| MCHPMicrochip Technology Inc. | 1.02% | 0.18% | 0.84% |
| MDLZMondelez International Inc Com A Npv | 0.41% | 0.35% | 0.06% |
| SBUXStarbucks Corp | 0.25% | 0.50% | 0.25% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of DIVB 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, DIVB or QQQ?
DIVB has an expense ratio of 0.05% while QQQ charges 0.18%. DIVB is the cheaper option, by $13 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, DIVB or QQQ?
Over the past year DIVB returned +26.27% vs +24.33% for QQQ, so DIVB leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), DIVB annualized +13.00% vs +19.95% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, DIVB or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.9% annualized versus 17.1% for DIVB. Worst drawdown: DIVB -36.9% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both DIVB and QQQ?
DIVB and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between DIVB and QQQ?
14.7% of DIVB's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 7.1% of QQQ's is in holdings DIVB also owns. They hold 17 positions in common, counted across the 382 positions we hold weights for in DIVB and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, DIVB or QQQ?
DIVB yields 2.02% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so DIVB currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than DIVB?
DIVB has a lower expense ratio. DIVB led over 1Y, QQQ over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. DIVB is less concentrated, with 31.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.