FNDX vs QQQ
Schwab Fundamental US Large Company ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, FNDX or QQQ?
Large Cap Value against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. FNDX led over 1Y, QQQ over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FNDX is less concentrated, with 21.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%.
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 | FNDX | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $27.2B | $498.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.42% | 0.42% |
| Holdings | 736 | 321 |
| YTD Return | +19.04% | +22.09%Best |
| 1Y Return | +26.30%Best | +24.51% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.28% | +27.61%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.12% | +16.57%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.8%Best | 17.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -37.7% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,356 | $21,525Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 21.4%Best | 47.2% |
| 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 Oct 12, 2026 (13.2 years).
FNDX 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 13.2 years both funds cover.
FNDX vs QQQ Performance
Schwab Fundamental US Large Company ETF (FNDX) 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 FNDX returned +26.30% while QQQ returned +24.51%. Year to date, FNDX is up 19.04% versus a gain of 22.09% for QQQ.
Over three years, FNDX compounded at +22.28% per year against +27.61% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +14.12% and +16.57% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +19.32% annualized vs +11.87%.
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 14.8% for FNDX. 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 -37.7% for FNDX 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
FNDX 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, FNDX currently yields 1.42% against 0.42% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
29.0% of FNDX's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 89.8% of QQQ's money is in holdings FNDX also owns.
Most of QQQ is already inside FNDX. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
78 positions in common, counted across the 732 positions we hold weights for in FNDX and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 736 and 321.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 18 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for FNDX (8.0% of the fund), and 639 for FNDX that do not appear in QQQ (70.2%).
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 FNDX | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.67% | 7.80% | 3.13% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 0.62% | 8.45% | 7.83% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 2.75% | 5.88% | 3.13% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 1.77% | 4.41% | 2.64% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.99% | 4.85% | 3.86% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 1.77% | 3.15% | 1.38% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.37% | 3.07% | 1.70% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 1.41% | 2.93% | 1.52% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 0.29% | 3.71% | 3.42% |
| INTCIntel Corporation | 1.63% | 2.28% | 0.65% |
89.8% of QQQ is already inside FNDX.
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, FNDX or QQQ?
FNDX 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, FNDX or QQQ?
Over the past year FNDX returned +26.30% vs +24.51% for QQQ, so FNDX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), FNDX annualized +11.87% vs +19.32% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FNDX or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.9% annualized versus 14.8% for FNDX. Worst drawdown: FNDX -37.7% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both FNDX and QQQ?
FNDX 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 FNDX and QQQ?
89.8% of QQQ's money is in holdings FNDX also owns. 89.8% of QQQ's is in holdings FNDX also owns. They hold 78 positions in common, counted across the 732 positions we hold weights for in FNDX and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, FNDX or QQQ?
FNDX yields 1.42% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so FNDX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than FNDX?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. FNDX led over 1Y, QQQ over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FNDX is less concentrated, with 21.4% 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.