EFAD vs QQQ
ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 103 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EFAD | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.50% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $62M | $455.8B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.64% | 0.41% | |
| Holdings | 78 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +7.19% | +18.31% | |
| 1Y Return | +6.25% | +25.37% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.32% | +25.79% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.51% | +15.20% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.1% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -35.7% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 19, 2014 | Mar 10, 1999 |
EFAD vs QQQ Performance
ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF (EFAD) is a ETF from ProShares and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year EFAD returned +6.25% while QQQ returned +25.37%. Year to date, EFAD is up 7.19% versus a gain of 18.31% for QQQ.
Over three years, EFAD compounded at +8.32% per year against +25.79% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +0.51% and +15.20% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.10% annualized vs +3.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% 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 -83.0% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
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 2.64% against 0.41% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
EFAD and QQQ share 1 holdings out of 177 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.7% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in EFAD | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASML:AS | 1.65% | 0.70% | 0.95% |
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. On a $10,000 investment, that is $32 per year of difference.
Which performed better, EFAD or QQQ?
Over the past year EFAD returned +6.25% vs +25.37% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), EFAD annualized +3.05% vs +13.10% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, EFAD or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 14.1% for EFAD. Worst drawdown: EFAD -35.7% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both EFAD and QQQ?
EFAD and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.71, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between EFAD and QQQ?
EFAD and QQQ share 1 common holdings with a 0.7% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 177 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, EFAD or QQQ?
EFAD yields 2.64% while QQQ yields 0.41%, so EFAD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.