GEEQ vs QQQ

GEEQ vs QQQ

Which is better, GEEQ or QQQ?

Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. GEEQ is less concentrated, with 11.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.7%.

Lower Fees: QQQLess Concentrated: GEEQ

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

MetricGEEQQQQ
Expense Ratio0.35%0.18%Best
AUM$61M$506.1B
Dividend Yield0.80%0.42%
Holdings112321
YTD Return+2.80%+16.56%Best
1Y Return-+13.92%
3Y Return (annualized)-+28.03%
5Y Return (annualized)-+14.12%
Top 10 Weight11.8%Best46.7%
Fund FamilyGuggenheim InvestmentsInvesco (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Growth
InceptionAug 20, 2026Mar 10, 1999

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

GEEQ 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.

GEEQ vs QQQ Performance

Guggenheim Enhanced Equity Income ETF (GEEQ) is an ETF from Guggenheim Investments and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Year to date, GEEQ is up 2.80% versus a gain of 16.56% for QQQ.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

GEEQ charges 0.35% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $18 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GEEQ currently yields 0.80% against 0.42% for QQQ.

Holdings Overlap

GEEQ already in QQQ7.1%
QQQ already in GEEQ2.4%

7.1% of GEEQ's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 2.4% of QQQ's money is in holdings GEEQ also owns.

GEEQ and QQQ share little of their money.

8 positions in common, counted across the 112 positions we hold weights for in GEEQ and 101 in QQQ, against full books of 112 and 321.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 86 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for GEEQ (94.8% of the fund), and 93 for GEEQ that do not appear in QQQ (93.3%).

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

StockWeight in GEEQWeight in QQQDifference
PEPPepsico Inc.1.02%0.72%0.30%
CMCSAComcast Corp. Class A0.98%0.32%0.66%
AEPAmerican Electric Power Co Inc1.02%0.27%0.75%
HONHoneywell International Inc0.96%0.28%0.68%
PAYXPaychex, Inc.1.05%0.15%0.90%
XELXcel Energy Inc.1.02%0.18%0.84%
EXCExelon1.02%0.17%0.85%
MDLZMondelez International Inc Com A Npv0.00%0.31%0.31%

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of GEEQ and QQQ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

GEEQQQQ

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, GEEQ or QQQ?

GEEQ has an expense ratio of 0.35% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between GEEQ and QQQ?

7.1% of GEEQ's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 2.4% of QQQ's is in holdings GEEQ also owns. They hold 8 positions in common, counted across the 112 positions we hold weights for in GEEQ and 101 in QQQ.

Which pays a higher dividend, GEEQ or QQQ?

GEEQ yields 0.80% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so GEEQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is QQQ better than GEEQ?

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. GEEQ is less concentrated, with 11.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.