GBAB vs QQQ
Guggenheim Taxable Municipal Bond & Investment Grade Debt Trust vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. GBAB offers more diversification with 636 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GBAB | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.93% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $394M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 10.66% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 636 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | -0.55% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +0.18% | +27.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +7.34% | +25.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -2.53% | +14.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.7% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -35.8% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Guggenheim Investments | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 26, 2010 | Mar 10, 1999 |
GBAB vs QQQ Performance
Guggenheim Taxable Municipal Bond & Investment Grade Debt Trust (GBAB) is a ETF from Guggenheim Investments and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year GBAB returned +0.18% while QQQ returned +27.27%. Year to date, GBAB is down 0.55% versus a gain of 16.64% for QQQ.
Over three years, GBAB compounded at +7.34% per year against +25.96% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are -2.53% and +14.54% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.03% annualized vs +0.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 11.7% for GBAB. 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 -35.8% for GBAB and -83.0% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.27. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GBAB charges 2.93% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $293 vs $18 annually, a gap of $275 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GBAB currently yields 10.66% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
GBAB and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 316 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GBAB or QQQ?
GBAB has an expense ratio of 2.93% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $275 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GBAB or QQQ?
Over the past year GBAB returned +0.18% vs +27.27% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GBAB annualized +0.73% vs +13.03% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GBAB or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 11.7% for GBAB. Worst drawdown: GBAB -35.8% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both GBAB and QQQ?
GBAB and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.27, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GBAB and QQQ?
GBAB and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 316 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GBAB or QQQ?
GBAB yields 10.66% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so GBAB currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.