GFLW vs QQQ
VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, GFLW or QQQ?
QQQ has been ahead.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. GFLW is less concentrated, with 26.5% 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 | GFLW | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $1.1B | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 102 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +17.27%Best | +16.87% |
| 1Y Return | +16.60% | +22.98%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +24.98% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +14.39% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.3%Best | 19.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -24.1% | -22.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $13,172 | $13,866Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 26.5%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | Victory Capital Management Inc. | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 3, 2024 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 4, 2024 to Sep 11, 2026 (1.8 years).
GFLW 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 1.8 years both funds cover.
GFLW vs QQQ Performance
VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) is an ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc. and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year GFLW returned +16.60% while QQQ returned +22.98%. Year to date, GFLW is up 17.27% versus a gain of 16.87% for QQQ.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.6% compared with 19.3% for GFLW. 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 -24.1% for GFLW 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 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GFLW charges 0.39% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $18 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GFLW currently yields 0.00% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
36.3% of GFLW's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 28.2% of QQQ's money is in holdings GFLW also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
29 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in GFLW and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 102 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 66 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for GFLW (68.8% of the fund), and 69 for GFLW that do not appear in QQQ (60.8%).
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 GFLW | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 3.92% | 8.44% | 4.52% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.52% | 3.16% | 0.64% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 2.38% | 1.86% | 0.52% |
| LRCXLam Research Corpcommon Stock | 2.27% | 1.69% | 0.58% |
| SNDKSandisk Corp/De | 2.61% | 0.88% | 1.73% |
| KLACKla Corp. | 1.59% | 1.11% | 0.48% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks Inc. | 1.19% | 1.30% | 0.11% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 0.74% | 1.60% | 0.86% |
| BKNGBooking Holdings, Inc. | 1.57% | 0.70% | 0.87% |
| ADBEAdobe Inc | 1.57% | 0.46% | 1.11% |
36.3% of GFLW 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, GFLW or QQQ?
GFLW has an expense ratio of 0.39% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $21 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GFLW or QQQ?
Over the past year GFLW returned +16.60% vs +22.98% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), GFLW annualized +16.54% vs +19.91% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GFLW or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.6% annualized versus 19.3% for GFLW. Worst drawdown: GFLW -24.1% vs QQQ -22.8%.
Should I hold both GFLW and QQQ?
GFLW and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GFLW and QQQ?
36.3% of GFLW's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 28.2% of QQQ's is in holdings GFLW also owns. They hold 29 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in GFLW and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, GFLW or QQQ?
GFLW yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than GFLW?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. GFLW is less concentrated, with 26.5% 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.