GQQQ vs VOO
Astoria US Quality Growth Kings ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, GQQQ or VOO?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
VOO has a lower expense ratio. GQQQ led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. VOO is less concentrated, with 36.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.5%.
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 | GQQQ | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $164M | $997.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.46% | 1.04% |
| Holdings | 104 | 509 |
| YTD Return | +18.48%Best | +12.50% |
| 1Y Return | +24.01%Best | +17.58% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.27% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.95% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.4% | 12.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -22.2% | -18.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.9 years | $14,252Best | $13,634 |
| Top 10 Weight | 43.5% | 36.4%Best |
| Fund Family | Astoria Portfolio Advisors | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Oct 1, 2024 | Sep 7, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 11, 2026 (1.9 years).
GQQQ vs VOO 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 1.9 years both funds cover.
GQQQ vs VOO Performance
Astoria US Quality Growth Kings ETF (GQQQ) is an ETF from Astoria Portfolio Advisors and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GQQQ returned +24.01% while VOO returned +17.58%. Year to date, GQQQ is up 18.48% versus a gain of 12.50% for VOO.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GQQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.4% compared with 12.8% for VOO. 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 -22.2% for GQQQ and -18.7% for VOO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GQQQ charges 0.35% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $3 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GQQQ currently yields 0.46% against 1.04% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
90.6% of GQQQ's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 60.8% of VOO's money is in holdings GQQQ also owns.
Most of GQQQ is already inside VOO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
The two holdings books were reported 62 days apart, GQQQ as of Aug 31, 2026 and VOO as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
80 positions in common, counted across the 103 positions we hold weights for in GQQQ and 505 in VOO, against full books of 104 and 509.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 416 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for GQQQ (38.7% of the fund), and 20 for GQQQ that do not appear in VOO (8.2%).
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 GQQQ | Weight in VOO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 8.38% | 7.51% | 0.87% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.66% | 6.59% | 1.07% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 5.69% | 4.30% | 1.39% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.19% | 3.62% | 0.57% |
| GOOGLAlphabet A Usd 0.001 | 3.47% | 3.25% | 0.22% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.28% | 2.77% | 0.51% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.70% | 2.02% | 1.68% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.53% | 2.59% | 0.06% |
| METAMeta Platforms, Inc. | 2.22% | 1.92% | 0.30% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 2.12% | 1.84% | 0.28% |
90.6% of GQQQ is already inside VOO.
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, GQQQ or VOO?
GQQQ has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GQQQ or VOO?
Over the past year GQQQ returned +24.01% vs +17.58% for VOO, so GQQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), GQQQ annualized +20.50% vs +17.72% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GQQQ or VOO?
GQQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.4% annualized versus 12.8% for VOO. Worst drawdown: GQQQ -22.2% vs VOO -18.7%.
Should I hold both GQQQ and VOO?
GQQQ and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 GQQQ and VOO?
90.6% of GQQQ's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 60.8% of VOO's is in holdings GQQQ also owns. They hold 80 positions in common, counted across the 103 positions we hold weights for in GQQQ and 505 in VOO.
Which pays a higher dividend, GQQQ or VOO?
GQQQ yields 0.46% while VOO yields 1.04%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VOO better than GQQQ?
VOO has a lower expense ratio. GQQQ led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. VOO is less concentrated, with 36.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.