IBOT vs QQQ
VanEck Robotics ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, IBOT or QQQ?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. IBOT led over 1Y, QQQ over 3Y and the full window. IBOT is less concentrated, with 41.3% 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 | IBOT | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.47% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $91M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.30% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 66 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +17.47% | +17.95%Best |
| 1Y Return | +26.77%Best | +21.77% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.75% | +25.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.24% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.5% | 17.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -23.3% | -22.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.5 years | $20,166 | $23,378Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 41.3%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | VanEck | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Apr 5, 2023 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.5 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 6, 2023 to Sep 18, 2026 (3.5 years).
IBOT 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 3.5 years both funds cover.
IBOT vs QQQ Performance
VanEck Robotics ETF (IBOT) is an ETF from VanEck and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IBOT returned +26.77% while QQQ returned +21.77%. Year to date, IBOT is up 17.47% versus a gain of 17.95% for QQQ.
Over three years, IBOT compounded at +23.75% per year against +25.63% for QQQ. Across the full 4-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +27.46% annualized vs +22.19%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IBOT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.5% compared with 17.2% for QQQ. 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 -23.3% for IBOT 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 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IBOT charges 0.47% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $47 vs $18 annually, a gap of $29 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IBOT currently yields 0.30% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
22.0% of IBOT's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 17.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings IBOT also owns.
IBOT and QQQ share little of their money.
11 positions in common, counted across the 65 positions we hold weights for in IBOT and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 66 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 86 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for IBOT (81.3% of the fund), and 16 for IBOT that do not appear in QQQ (24.3%).
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 IBOT | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 5.41% | 8.44% | 3.03% |
| ASL:ASAsml Holding Nv Unsponsored Adr Ordinary Shares | 4.77% | 0.68% | 4.09% |
| ADSKAutodesk, Inc. | 4.30% | 0.22% | 4.08% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.38% | 1.86% | 0.48% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 1.40% | 1.69% | 0.29% |
| TXNTexas Instrument Inc | 1.06% | 1.12% | 0.06% |
| KLACKla Corp | 0.93% | 1.11% | 0.18% |
| ADIAnalog Devices, Inc. | 0.90% | 0.81% | 0.09% |
| ISRGIntuitive Surgical Inc. | 0.80% | 0.58% | 0.22% |
| TERTeradyne Inc - Common | 0.59% | 0.27% | 0.32% |
22.0% of IBOT 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, IBOT or QQQ?
IBOT has an expense ratio of 0.47% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $29 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IBOT or QQQ?
Over the past year IBOT returned +26.77% vs +21.77% for QQQ, so IBOT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), IBOT annualized +22.19% vs +27.46% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IBOT or QQQ?
IBOT has been the more volatile fund at 20.5% annualized versus 17.2% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: IBOT -23.3% vs QQQ -22.8%.
Should I hold both IBOT and QQQ?
IBOT and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, 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 IBOT and QQQ?
22.0% of IBOT's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 17.0% of QQQ's is in holdings IBOT also owns. They hold 11 positions in common, counted across the 65 positions we hold weights for in IBOT and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, IBOT or QQQ?
IBOT yields 0.30% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than IBOT?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. IBOT led over 1Y, QQQ over 3Y and the full window. IBOT is less concentrated, with 41.3% 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.