IBDW vs QQQ
iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
IBDW has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. IBDW offers more diversification with 610 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IBDW | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.10% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $2.6B | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.81% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 610 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +0.13% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.78% | +27.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.65% | +25.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.06% | +14.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 8.2% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -23.9% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 22, 2021 | Mar 10, 1999 |
IBDW vs QQQ Performance
iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF (IBDW) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IBDW returned +2.78% while QQQ returned +27.27%. Year to date, IBDW is up 0.13% versus a gain of 16.64% for QQQ.
Over three years, IBDW compounded at +6.65% per year against +25.96% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +0.06% and +14.54% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.03% annualized vs +0.44%. 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 8.2% for IBDW. 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 -23.9% for IBDW 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 0.64. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IBDW charges 0.10% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $10 vs $18 annually, a gap of $8 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IBDW currently yields 4.81% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
IBDW and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 532 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, IBDW or QQQ?
IBDW has an expense ratio of 0.10% while QQQ charges 0.18%. IBDW is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $8 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IBDW or QQQ?
Over the past year IBDW returned +2.78% vs +27.27% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), IBDW annualized +0.44% vs +13.03% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IBDW or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 8.2% for IBDW. Worst drawdown: IBDW -23.9% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both IBDW and QQQ?
IBDW and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.64, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IBDW and QQQ?
IBDW and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 532 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IBDW or QQQ?
IBDW yields 4.81% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so IBDW 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.