EWA vs QQQ
iShares MSCI Australia 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 | EWA | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.50% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $1.4B | $455.8B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.01% | 0.41% | |
| Holdings | 54 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +14.74% | +17.46% | |
| 1Y Return | +15.91% | +26.02% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.46% | +25.51% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.77% | +15.12% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.6% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -69.7% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 12, 1996 | Mar 10, 1999 |
EWA vs QQQ Performance
iShares MSCI Australia ETF (EWA) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year EWA returned +15.91% while QQQ returned +26.02%. Year to date, EWA is up 14.74% versus a gain of 17.46% for QQQ.
Over three years, EWA compounded at +14.46% per year against +25.51% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +6.77% and +15.12% respectively. Across the full 27-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.08% annualized vs +4.30%. 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 21.6% for EWA. 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 -69.7% for EWA 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
EWA 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, EWA currently yields 3.01% against 0.41% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
EWA and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 151 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, EWA or QQQ?
EWA 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, EWA or QQQ?
Over the past year EWA returned +15.91% vs +26.02% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (27 years), EWA annualized +4.30% vs +13.08% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, EWA or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 21.6% for EWA. Worst drawdown: EWA -69.7% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both EWA and QQQ?
EWA 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 EWA and QQQ?
EWA and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 151 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, EWA or QQQ?
EWA yields 3.01% while QQQ yields 0.41%, so EWA 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.