DSI vs QQQ
iShares ESG MSCI KLD 400 ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, DSI or QQQ?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. DSI is less concentrated, with 44.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.5%.
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 | DSI | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $5.4B | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.84% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 407 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +12.41% | +15.18%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.00% | +19.65%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.70% | +24.60%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.90% | +13.94%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.8%Best | 18.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -55.1% | -53.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,545 | $19,204Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.5%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Nov 14, 2006 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 17, 2006 to Sep 15, 2026 (19.8 years).
DSI 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 19.8 years both funds cover.
DSI vs QQQ Performance
iShares ESG MSCI KLD 400 ETF (DSI) 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 DSI returned +17.00% while QQQ returned +19.65%. Year to date, DSI is up 12.41% versus a gain of 15.18% for QQQ.
Over three years, DSI compounded at +20.70% per year against +24.60% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +11.90% and +13.94% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +15.16% annualized vs +9.53%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.7% compared with 15.8% for DSI. 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 -55.1% for DSI and -53.5% 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
DSI charges 0.25% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $25 vs $18 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DSI currently yields 0.84% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
55.0% of DSI's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 53.2% of QQQ's money is in holdings DSI also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
51 positions in common, counted across the 400 positions we hold weights for in DSI and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 407 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 45 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for DSI (44.4% of the fund), and 321 for DSI that do not appear in QQQ (43.9%).
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 DSI | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 14.08% | 8.44% | 5.64% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 9.93% | 5.76% | 4.17% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 5.53% | 3.36% | 2.17% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 4.35% | 3.13% | 1.22% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 2.13% | 3.45% | 1.32% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 2.92% | 2.56% | 0.36% |
| INTCIntel Corporation | 1.09% | 2.23% | 1.14% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.21% | 2.10% | 0.89% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.01% | 1.86% | 0.85% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp 3.125 06/15/2060 | 1.05% | 1.69% | 0.64% |
55.0% of DSI 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, DSI or QQQ?
DSI has an expense ratio of 0.25% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $7 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, DSI or QQQ?
Over the past year DSI returned +17.00% vs +19.65% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), DSI annualized +9.53% vs +15.16% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, DSI or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 18.7% annualized versus 15.8% for DSI. Worst drawdown: DSI -55.1% vs QQQ -53.5%.
Should I hold both DSI and QQQ?
DSI 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 DSI and QQQ?
55.0% of DSI's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 53.2% of QQQ's is in holdings DSI also owns. They hold 51 positions in common, counted across the 400 positions we hold weights for in DSI and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, DSI or QQQ?
DSI yields 0.84% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so DSI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than DSI?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. DSI is less concentrated, with 44.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.