FNDB vs QQQ
Schwab Fundamental US Broad Market ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, FNDB or QQQ?
Large Cap Value against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FNDB is less concentrated, with 19.5% 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 | FNDB | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $1.5B | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.41% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 1,629 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +16.66% | +21.18%Best |
| 1Y Return | +22.35% | +24.36%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.61% | +27.99%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.24% | +15.39%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.2%Best | 17.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -38.2% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,621 | $20,457Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 19.5%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | Charles Schwab Asset Management | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Aug 15, 2013 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 15, 2013 to Sep 23, 2026 (13.1 years).
FNDB 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 13.1 years both funds cover.
FNDB vs QQQ Performance
Schwab Fundamental US Broad Market ETF (FNDB) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FNDB returned +22.35% while QQQ returned +24.36%. Year to date, FNDB is up 16.66% versus a gain of 21.18% for QQQ.
Over three years, FNDB compounded at +20.61% per year against +27.99% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +13.24% and +15.39% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +19.33% annualized vs +11.54%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.9% compared with 15.2% for FNDB. 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 -38.2% for FNDB 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 0.76. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FNDB charges 0.25% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $25 vs $18 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FNDB currently yields 1.41% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
26.8% of FNDB's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 93.1% of QQQ's money is in holdings FNDB also owns.
Most of QQQ is already inside FNDB. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
85 positions in common, counted across the 1,622 positions we hold weights for in FNDB and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 1,629 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 11 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for FNDB (4.4% of the fund), and 1,191 for FNDB that do not appear in QQQ (71.4%).
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 FNDB | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.16% | 7.27% | 3.11% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 0.59% | 8.44% | 7.85% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 2.64% | 5.76% | 3.12% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 1.68% | 4.67% | 2.99% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.90% | 4.43% | 3.53% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 1.66% | 3.36% | 1.70% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 1.32% | 3.13% | 1.81% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.13% | 2.78% | 1.65% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 0.25% | 3.45% | 3.20% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.45% | 3.16% | 2.71% |
93.1% of QQQ is already inside FNDB.
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, FNDB or QQQ?
FNDB has an expense ratio of 0.25% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $7 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FNDB or QQQ?
Over the past year FNDB returned +22.35% vs +24.36% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), FNDB annualized +11.54% vs +19.33% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FNDB or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.9% annualized versus 15.2% for FNDB. Worst drawdown: FNDB -38.2% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both FNDB and QQQ?
FNDB and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.76, 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 FNDB and QQQ?
93.1% of QQQ's money is in holdings FNDB also owns. 93.1% of QQQ's is in holdings FNDB also owns. They hold 85 positions in common, counted across the 1,622 positions we hold weights for in FNDB and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, FNDB or QQQ?
FNDB yields 1.41% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so FNDB currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than FNDB?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FNDB is less concentrated, with 19.5% 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.