EXEQ vs QQQ

EXEQ vs QQQ

Which is better, EXEQ or QQQ?

Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. EXEQ is less concentrated, with 40.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%.

Lower Fees: QQQLess Concentrated: EXEQ

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

MetricEXEQQQQ
Expense Ratio0.75%0.18%Best
AUM$1M$498.6B
Dividend Yield0.09%0.42%
Holdings105321
YTD Return+7.50%+22.67%Best
1Y Return-+24.33%
3Y Return (annualized)-+29.05%
5Y Return (annualized)-+17.00%
Top 10 Weight40.9%Best47.2%
Fund FamilyWedbush FundsInvesco (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Growth
InceptionFeb 13, 2026Mar 10, 1999

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

EXEQ 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.

EXEQ vs QQQ Performance

Wedbush ReturnOnLeadership US Large-Cap ETF (EXEQ) is an ETF from Wedbush Funds and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Year to date, EXEQ is up 7.50% versus a gain of 22.67% for QQQ.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

EXEQ charges 0.75% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $18 annually, a gap of $57 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EXEQ currently yields 0.09% against 0.42% for QQQ.

Holdings Overlap

EXEQ already in QQQ26.6%
QQQ already in EXEQ19.4%

26.6% of EXEQ's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 19.4% of QQQ's money is in holdings EXEQ also owns.

EXEQ and QQQ share little of their money.

15 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in EXEQ and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 105 and 321.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 81 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for EXEQ (78.4% of the fund), and 34 for EXEQ that do not appear in QQQ (65.1%).

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

StockWeight in EXEQWeight in QQQDifference
MSFTMicrosoft Corp3.29%5.88%2.59%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A2.15%3.15%1.00%
GOOGAlphabet Inc. C2.12%2.93%0.81%
MELIMercadolibre Inc2.96%0.42%2.54%
VRTXNvaesrtex Pharmaceuticals Inc2.71%0.58%2.13%
ABNBAirbnb Inc2.44%0.31%2.13%
AMGNAmgen Inc.1.71%0.90%0.81%
NFLXNetflix, Inc.0.88%1.44%0.56%
FANGDiamondback Energy, Inc.2.02%0.25%1.77%
GILDGilead Sciences Inc1.29%0.79%0.50%

26.6% of EXEQ is already inside QQQ.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

EXEQQQQ

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, EXEQ or QQQ?

EXEQ has an expense ratio of 0.75% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $57 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between EXEQ and QQQ?

26.6% of EXEQ's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 19.4% of QQQ's is in holdings EXEQ also owns. They hold 15 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in EXEQ and 102 in QQQ.

Which pays a higher dividend, EXEQ or QQQ?

EXEQ yields 0.09% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is QQQ better than EXEQ?

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. EXEQ is less concentrated, with 40.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.