EFAD vs QQQ
ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, EFAD 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. EFAD is less concentrated, with 16.2% 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 | EFAD | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.50% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $65M | $486.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.58% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 75 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +7.23% | +17.54%Best |
| 1Y Return | +6.94% | +25.59%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.96% | +24.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.07% | +14.18%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.1%Best | 18.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -35.7% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $10,035 | $19,407Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 16.2%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Aug 19, 2014 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 21, 2014 to Sep 4, 2026 (12 years).
EFAD 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.
EFAD vs QQQ Performance
ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF (EFAD) is an ETF from ProShares and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year EFAD returned +6.94% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, EFAD is up 7.23% versus a gain of 17.54% for QQQ.
Over three years, EFAD compounded at +8.96% per year against +24.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +0.07% and +14.18% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +18.23% annualized vs +3.04%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.5% compared with 14.1% for EFAD. 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 -35.7% for EFAD 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 0.71. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EFAD charges 0.50% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $50 vs $18 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EFAD currently yields 2.58% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
1.4% of EFAD's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 0.7% of QQQ's money is in holdings EFAD also owns.
EFAD and QQQ share little of their money.
1 positions in common, counted across the 74 positions we hold weights for in EFAD and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 75 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 94 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for EFAD (96.8% of the fund), and 1 for EFAD that do not appear in QQQ (1.2%).
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 EFAD | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASML:ASAsml Holding Nv | 1.45% | 0.68% | 0.77% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of EFAD 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, EFAD or QQQ?
EFAD has an expense ratio of 0.50% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EFAD or QQQ?
Over the past year EFAD returned +6.94% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), EFAD annualized +3.04% vs +18.23% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EFAD or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 18.5% annualized versus 14.1% for EFAD. Worst drawdown: EFAD -35.7% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both EFAD and QQQ?
EFAD and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.71, 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 EFAD and QQQ?
1.4% of EFAD's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 0.7% of QQQ's is in holdings EFAD also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 74 positions we hold weights for in EFAD and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, EFAD or QQQ?
EFAD yields 2.58% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so EFAD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than EFAD?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. EFAD is less concentrated, with 16.2% 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.