EMO vs QQQ
ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund Inc. 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 108 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EMO | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 3.37% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $1.2B | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 7.36% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 20 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +24.62% | +19.52% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.01% | +26.68% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +30.20% | +26.64% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +30.37% | +15.36% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 41.8% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -97.2% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 13, 2011 | Mar 10, 1999 |
EMO vs QQQ Performance
ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund Inc. (EMO) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year EMO returned +22.01% while QQQ returned +26.68%. Year to date, EMO is up 24.62% versus a gain of 19.52% for QQQ.
Over three years, EMO compounded at +30.20% per year against +26.64% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +30.37% and +15.36% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.14% annualized vs -1.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EMO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 41.8% compared with 30.6% 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 -97.2% for EMO 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 0.44. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EMO charges 3.37% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $337 vs $18 annually, a gap of $319 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EMO currently yields 7.36% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
EMO and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 122 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EMO or QQQ?
EMO has an expense ratio of 3.37% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $319 per year of difference.
Which performed better, EMO or QQQ?
Over the past year EMO returned +22.01% vs +26.68% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), EMO annualized -1.25% vs +13.14% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, EMO or QQQ?
EMO has been the more volatile fund at 41.8% annualized versus 30.6% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: EMO -97.2% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both EMO and QQQ?
EMO and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.44, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between EMO and QQQ?
EMO and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 122 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, EMO or QQQ?
EMO yields 7.36% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so EMO 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.