ICLN vs QQQ
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. ICLN delivered stronger 1-year returns. ICLN offers more diversification with 152 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ICLN | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $2.3B | $455.8B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.90% | 0.41% | |
| Holdings | 152 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +7.66% | +19.68% | |
| 1Y Return | +34.44% | +26.75% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.84% | +26.25% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -2.59% | +15.39% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 30.9% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -88.3% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 24, 2008 | Mar 10, 1999 |
ICLN vs QQQ Performance
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) 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 ICLN returned +34.44% while QQQ returned +26.75%. Year to date, ICLN is up 7.66% versus a gain of 19.68% for QQQ.
Over three years, ICLN compounded at +4.84% per year against +26.25% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are -2.59% and +15.39% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.15% annualized vs -5.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ICLN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.9% compared with 30.6% 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 -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 0.67. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
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 0.90% against 0.41% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
ICLN and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 208 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, ICLN or QQQ?
ICLN has an expense ratio of 0.39% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $21 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ICLN or QQQ?
Over the past year ICLN returned +34.44% vs +26.75% for QQQ, so ICLN leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), ICLN annualized -5.22% vs +13.15% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ICLN or QQQ?
ICLN has been the more volatile fund at 30.9% annualized versus 30.6% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: ICLN -88.3% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both ICLN and QQQ?
ICLN and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.67, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ICLN and QQQ?
ICLN and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 208 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ICLN or QQQ?
ICLN yields 0.90% while QQQ yields 0.41%, so ICLN 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.