ICLN vs QQQ
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, ICLN or QQQ?
Mid Cap Growth against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.5%.
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 | ICLN | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $2.2B | $486.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.04% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 152 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +4.20% | +17.54%Best |
| 1Y Return | +25.31% | +25.59%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.91% | +24.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -3.91% | +14.18%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 30.8% | 18.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -88.3% | -47.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $8,192 | $19,407Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 54.5% | 46.5%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 24, 2008 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 25, 2008 to Sep 4, 2026 (18.2 years).
ICLN 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
ICLN vs QQQ Performance
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year ICLN returned +25.31% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, ICLN is up 4.20% versus a gain of 17.54% for QQQ.
Over three years, ICLN compounded at +5.91% per year against +24.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are -3.91% and +14.18% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +16.30% annualized vs -5.38%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ICLN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.8% compared with 18.7% 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 -88.3% for ICLN and -47.0% 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 0.67. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ICLN charges 0.39% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $18 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ICLN currently yields 1.04% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 105 holdings in ICLN and 102 in QQQ, totalling 100.5% and 99.9% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 105 positions we hold weights for in ICLN and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 152 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 96 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for ICLN (97.5% of the fund), and 15 for ICLN that do not appear in QQQ (48.4%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of ICLN and QQQ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ICLN or QQQ?
ICLN has an expense ratio of 0.39% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $21 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ICLN or QQQ?
Over the past year ICLN returned +25.31% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), ICLN annualized -5.38% vs +16.30% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ICLN or QQQ?
ICLN has been the more volatile fund at 30.8% annualized versus 18.7% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: ICLN -88.3% vs QQQ -47.0%.
Should I hold both ICLN and QQQ?
ICLN and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.67, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, ICLN or QQQ?
ICLN yields 1.04% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so ICLN currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than ICLN?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.