GLIN vs QQQ
VanEck India Growth Leaders ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 108 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GLIN | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.72% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $95M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.87% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 84 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | -2.40% | +16.23% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.39% | +26.23% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +7.72% | +25.75% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.11% | +14.78% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 29.5% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.4% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | VanEck | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 24, 2010 | Mar 10, 1999 |
GLIN vs QQQ Performance
VanEck India Growth Leaders ETF (GLIN) is a ETF from VanEck and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year GLIN returned +1.39% while QQQ returned +26.23%. Year to date, GLIN is down 2.40% versus a gain of 16.23% for QQQ.
Over three years, GLIN compounded at +7.72% per year against +25.75% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +3.11% and +14.78% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.02% annualized vs -2.51%. 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 29.5% for GLIN. 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 -79.4% for GLIN 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 0.44. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GLIN charges 0.72% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $72 vs $18 annually, a gap of $54 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GLIN currently yields 0.87% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
GLIN and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 182 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, GLIN or QQQ?
GLIN has an expense ratio of 0.72% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $54 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GLIN or QQQ?
Over the past year GLIN returned +1.39% vs +26.23% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GLIN annualized -2.51% vs +13.02% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GLIN or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 29.5% for GLIN. Worst drawdown: GLIN -79.4% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both GLIN and QQQ?
GLIN and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.44, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GLIN and QQQ?
GLIN and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 182 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GLIN or QQQ?
GLIN yields 0.87% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so GLIN 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.