GSEW vs QQQ
Goldman Sachs Equal Weight US Large Cap Equity ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, GSEW or QQQ?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
GSEW has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. GSEW is less concentrated, with 2.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%.
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 | GSEW | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.09%Best | 0.18% |
| AUM | $2.0B | $498.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.34% | 0.42% |
| Holdings | 499 | 321 |
| YTD Return | +11.16% | +24.32%Best |
| 1Y Return | +11.28% | +25.59%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +18.27% | +28.30%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.53% | +16.83%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.1%Best | 19.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -38.6% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,057 | $21,766Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 2.3%Best | 47.2% |
| Fund Family | Goldman Sachs Asset Management | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 12, 2017 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 14, 2017 to Oct 6, 2026 (9.1 years).
GSEW 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 9.1 years both funds cover.
GSEW vs QQQ Performance
Goldman Sachs Equal Weight US Large Cap Equity ETF (GSEW) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year GSEW returned +11.28% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, GSEW is up 11.16% versus a gain of 24.32% for QQQ.
Over three years, GSEW compounded at +18.27% per year against +28.30% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +8.53% and +16.83% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +20.45% annualized vs +11.50%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.8% compared with 17.1% for GSEW. 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 -38.6% for GSEW and -35.1% 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 0.81. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GSEW charges 0.09% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $9 vs $18 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GSEW currently yields 1.34% against 0.42% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
18.3% of GSEW's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 92.9% of QQQ's money is in holdings GSEW also owns.
Most of QQQ is already inside GSEW. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
91 positions in common, counted across the 498 positions we hold weights for in GSEW and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 499 and 321.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 4 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for GSEW (4.1% of the fund), and 391 for GSEW that do not appear in QQQ (78.5%).
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 GSEW | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 0.20% | 8.45% | 8.25% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.20% | 7.80% | 7.60% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 0.20% | 5.88% | 5.68% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.21% | 4.85% | 4.64% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 0.20% | 4.41% | 4.21% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 0.23% | 3.71% | 3.48% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 0.20% | 3.15% | 2.95% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 0.22% | 3.07% | 2.85% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 0.21% | 2.92% | 2.71% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.20% | 2.74% | 2.54% |
92.9% of QQQ is already inside GSEW.
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, GSEW or QQQ?
GSEW has an expense ratio of 0.09% while QQQ charges 0.18%. GSEW is the cheaper option, by $9 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GSEW or QQQ?
Over the past year GSEW returned +11.28% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), GSEW annualized +11.50% vs +20.45% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GSEW or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.8% annualized versus 17.1% for GSEW. Worst drawdown: GSEW -38.6% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both GSEW and QQQ?
GSEW and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.81, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GSEW and QQQ?
92.9% of QQQ's money is in holdings GSEW also owns. 92.9% of QQQ's is in holdings GSEW also owns. They hold 91 positions in common, counted across the 498 positions we hold weights for in GSEW and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, GSEW or QQQ?
GSEW yields 1.34% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so GSEW currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than GSEW?
GSEW has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. GSEW is less concentrated, with 2.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.