ECON vs QQQ
Columbia Research Enhanced Emerging Economies ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, ECON or QQQ?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. ECON led over 1Y, QQQ over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. ECON is less concentrated, with 28.4% 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 | ECON | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.47% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $316M | $486.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.51% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 376 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +29.57%Best | +17.54% |
| 1Y Return | +49.09%Best | +25.59% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.32% | +24.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.88% | +14.18%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.3% | 17.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -45.4% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $14,612 | $19,407Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 28.4%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | Columbia Threadneedle Investments | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 14, 2010 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 14, 2010 to Sep 4, 2026 (16 years).
ECON 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
ECON vs QQQ Performance
Columbia Research Enhanced Emerging Economies ETF (ECON) is an ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year ECON returned +49.09% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, ECON is up 29.57% versus a gain of 17.54% for QQQ.
Over three years, ECON compounded at +22.32% per year against +24.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +7.88% and +14.18% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +18.79% annualized vs +4.72%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ECON has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% compared with 17.2% for QQQ. 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 -45.4% for ECON 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 0.57. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ECON charges 0.47% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $47 vs $18 annually, a gap of $29 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ECON currently yields 1.51% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
1.3% of ECON's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 0.3% of QQQ's money is in holdings ECON also owns.
ECON and QQQ share little of their money.
1 positions in common, counted across the 347 positions we hold weights for in ECON and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 376 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 96 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for ECON (97.5% of the fund), and 8 for ECON that do not appear in QQQ (1.6%).
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 ECON | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| PDD:IEPdd Holdings Inc | 1.26% | 0.27% | 0.99% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of ECON 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, ECON or QQQ?
ECON has an expense ratio of 0.47% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $29 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ECON or QQQ?
Over the past year ECON returned +49.09% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so ECON leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), ECON annualized +4.72% vs +18.79% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ECON or QQQ?
ECON has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 17.2% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: ECON -45.4% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both ECON and QQQ?
ECON and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.57, 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 ECON and QQQ?
1.3% of ECON's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 0.3% of QQQ's is in holdings ECON also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 347 positions we hold weights for in ECON and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, ECON or QQQ?
ECON yields 1.51% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so ECON currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than ECON?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. ECON led over 1Y, QQQ over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. ECON is less concentrated, with 28.4% 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.