FMCX vs QQQ
FM Focus Equity ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, FMCX or QQQ?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.3%.
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 | FMCX | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.72% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $120M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.29% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 32 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +5.51% | +17.11%Best |
| 1Y Return | +6.34% | +23.99%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.06% | +24.62%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +14.23% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6%Best | 19.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.5%Best | -22.8% |
| $10,000 over 4.4 years | $14,938 | $22,419Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 54.3% | 46.5%Best |
| Fund Family | First Manhattan | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Apr 22, 2022 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 25, 2022 to Sep 9, 2026 (4.4 years).
FMCX 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 4.4 years both funds cover.
FMCX vs QQQ Performance
FM Focus Equity ETF (FMCX) is an ETF from First Manhattan and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FMCX returned +6.34% while QQQ returned +23.99%. Year to date, FMCX is up 5.51% versus a gain of 17.11% for QQQ.
Over three years, FMCX compounded at +14.06% per year against +24.62% for QQQ. Across the full 4-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +20.14% annualized vs +9.55%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.9% compared with 15.6% for FMCX. 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 -18.5% for FMCX and -22.8% 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 0.87. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FMCX charges 0.72% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $72 vs $18 annually, a gap of $54 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FMCX currently yields 0.29% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
46.2% of FMCX's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 38.8% of QQQ's money is in holdings FMCX also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 66 days apart, FMCX as of May 31, 2026 and QQQ as of Aug 5, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
15 positions in common, counted across the 32 positions we hold weights for in FMCX and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 32 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 81 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for FMCX (58.9% of the fund), and 16 for FMCX that do not appear in QQQ (52.9%).
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 FMCX | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.63% | 5.76% | 0.87% |
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 1.93% | 8.44% | 6.51% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.87% | 4.67% | 0.20% |
| INTCIntel Corporation | 5.38% | 2.23% | 3.15% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.83% | 3.16% | 0.67% |
| HONHoneywell International Inc. | 4.41% | 0.35% | 4.06% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 1.61% | 3.13% | 1.52% |
| METAMeta Platform Inc | 1.79% | 2.78% | 0.99% |
| LINLinde Plc Ordinary Shares | 3.25% | 1.00% | 2.25% |
| ORLYO'Eilly Automotive, Inc. | 3.56% | 0.34% | 3.22% |
46.2% of FMCX 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.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FMCX or QQQ?
FMCX has an expense ratio of 0.72% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $54 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FMCX or QQQ?
Over the past year FMCX returned +6.34% vs +23.99% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), FMCX annualized +9.55% vs +20.14% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FMCX or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.9% annualized versus 15.6% for FMCX. Worst drawdown: FMCX -18.5% vs QQQ -22.8%.
Should I hold both FMCX and QQQ?
FMCX and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.87, 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 FMCX and QQQ?
46.2% of FMCX's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 38.8% of QQQ's is in holdings FMCX also owns. They hold 15 positions in common, counted across the 32 positions we hold weights for in FMCX and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, FMCX or QQQ?
FMCX yields 0.29% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than FMCX?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.