FLCB vs QQQ
Franklin US Core Bond ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, FLCB or QQQ?
QQQ has been ahead.
FLCB has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FLCB is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.9%.
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 | FLCB | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.15%Best | 0.18% |
| AUM | $3.2B | $437.3B |
| Dividend Yield | 4.47% | 0.43% |
| Holdings | 959 | 208 |
| YTD Return | -0.42% | +7.37%Best |
| 1Y Return | -0.16% | +7.77%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.72% | +21.44%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.32% | +11.19%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.7%Best | 20.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -20.4%Best | -35.1% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $9,841 | $16,995Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8%Best | 46.9% |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | - | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 17, 2019 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 19, 2019 to Nov 6, 2026 (7.1 years).
FLCB 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.
FLCB vs QQQ Performance
Franklin US Core Bond ETF (FLCB) is an ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FLCB returned -0.16% while QQQ returned +7.77%. Year to date, FLCB is down 0.42% versus a gain of 7.37% for QQQ.
Over three years, FLCB compounded at +4.72% per year against +21.44% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are -0.32% and +11.19% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +19.29% annualized vs +0.18%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.8% compared with 5.7% for FLCB. 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 -20.4% for FLCB 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 0.49. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLCB charges 0.15% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $15 vs $18 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLCB currently yields 4.47% against 0.43% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
53.8% of FLCB's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 86.5% of QQQ's money is in holdings FLCB also owns.
Most of QQQ is already inside FLCB. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
66 positions in common, counted across the 285 positions we hold weights for in FLCB and 101 in QQQ, against full books of 959 and 208.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 28 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for FLCB (10.7% of the fund), and 212 for FLCB that do not appear in QQQ (44.4%).
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 FLCB | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 7.25% | 8.05% | 0.80% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 7.36% | 7.68% | 0.32% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.21% | 6.16% | 0.05% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.73% | 4.23% | 0.50% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 2.98% | 3.15% | 0.17% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.51% | 4.47% | 2.96% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.20% | 3.37% | 1.17% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 1.41% | 3.90% | 2.49% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.37% | 2.93% | 0.56% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.63% | 2.52% | 0.11% |
86.5% of QQQ is already inside FLCB.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FLCB or QQQ?
FLCB has an expense ratio of 0.15% while QQQ charges 0.18%. FLCB is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FLCB or QQQ?
Over the past year FLCB returned -0.16% vs +7.77% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), FLCB annualized +0.18% vs +19.29% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FLCB or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 20.8% annualized versus 5.7% for FLCB. Worst drawdown: FLCB -20.4% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both FLCB and QQQ?
FLCB and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.49, 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 FLCB and QQQ?
86.5% of QQQ's money is in holdings FLCB also owns. 86.5% of QQQ's is in holdings FLCB also owns. They hold 66 positions in common, counted across the 285 positions we hold weights for in FLCB and 101 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLCB or QQQ?
FLCB yields 4.47% while QQQ yields 0.43%, so FLCB currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than FLCB?
FLCB has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FLCB is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.