FCTR vs QQQ
First Trust Lunt US Factor Rotation ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, FCTR 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. FCTR is less concentrated, with 15.9% 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 | FCTR | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $57M | $486.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.50% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 331 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +11.17% | +17.54%Best |
| 1Y Return | +18.23% | +25.59%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.31% | +24.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.91% | +14.18%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.9%Best | 20.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -37.1% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,542 | $19,407Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 15.9%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 23, 2018 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 26, 2018 to Sep 4, 2026 (8.1 years).
FCTR 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 covers the 8.1 years both funds cover.
FCTR vs QQQ Performance
First Trust Lunt US Factor Rotation ETF (FCTR) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FCTR returned +18.23% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, FCTR is up 11.17% versus a gain of 17.54% for QQQ.
Over three years, FCTR compounded at +16.31% per year against +24.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +2.91% and +14.18% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +19.09% annualized vs +9.68%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.5% compared with 19.9% for FCTR. 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 -37.1% for FCTR 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 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FCTR charges 0.65% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $18 annually, a gap of $47 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FCTR currently yields 0.50% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
14.4% of FCTR's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 17.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings FCTR also owns.
QQQ and FCTR share little of their money.
25 positions in common, counted across the 167 positions we hold weights for in FCTR and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 331 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 71 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for FCTR (80.6% of the fund), and 139 for FCTR that do not appear in QQQ (84.5%).
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 FCTR | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 0.29% | 5.76% | 5.47% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.34% | 2.10% | 1.76% |
| COSTCostco Wholesale Corp. | 0.44% | 1.84% | 1.40% |
| ADBEAdobe Systems | 1.12% | 0.46% | 0.66% |
| INTUIntuit, Inc. | 1.04% | 0.39% | 0.65% |
| CTASCintas Corp. | 1.01% | 0.35% | 0.66% |
| ADPAutomatic Data Processing, Inc. | 0.79% | 0.47% | 0.32% |
| AMGNAmgen Inc. | 0.26% | 0.97% | 0.71% |
| PEPPepsico Inc. | 0.39% | 0.83% | 0.44% |
| MNSTMonster Beverage Corp. | 0.68% | 0.41% | 0.27% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of FCTR 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, FCTR or QQQ?
FCTR has an expense ratio of 0.65% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $47 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FCTR or QQQ?
Over the past year FCTR returned +18.23% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), FCTR annualized +9.68% vs +19.09% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FCTR or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 20.5% annualized versus 19.9% for FCTR. Worst drawdown: FCTR -37.1% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both FCTR and QQQ?
FCTR and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, 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 FCTR and QQQ?
17.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings FCTR also owns. 17.0% of QQQ's is in holdings FCTR also owns. They hold 25 positions in common, counted across the 167 positions we hold weights for in FCTR and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, FCTR or QQQ?
FCTR yields 0.50% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so FCTR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than FCTR?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FCTR is less concentrated, with 15.9% 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.