IGD vs QQQ

IGD vs QQQ

Which is better, IGD or QQQ?

Large Cap Value against Large Cap Growth.

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IGD is less concentrated, with 15.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.5%.

Lower Fees: QQQHigher Returns: QQQLess Concentrated: IGD

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

MetricIGDQQQ
Expense Ratio0.96%0.18%Best
AUM$479M$486.1B
Dividend Yield9.15%0.44%
Holdings251107
YTD Return+20.81%Best+17.54%
1Y Return+20.59%+25.59%Best
3Y Return (annualized)+20.47%+24.63%Best
5Y Return (annualized)+11.15%+14.18%Best
Volatility (annualized)17.2%Best18.4%
Max Drawdown-82.5%-53.5%Best
$10,000 over 5 years$16,965$19,407Best
Top 10 Weight15.8%Best46.5%
Fund FamilyVoya Investment ManagementInvesco (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap ValueLarge Cap Growth
InceptionMar 28, 2005Mar 10, 1999

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 29, 2005 to Sep 4, 2026 (21.4 years).

IGD 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.

IGD vs QQQ Performance

Voya Global Equity Dividend and Premium Opportunity Fund (IGD) is an ETF from Voya Investment Management and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IGD returned +20.59% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, IGD is up 20.81% versus a gain of 17.54% for QQQ.

Over three years, IGD compounded at +20.47% per year against +24.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +11.15% and +14.18% respectively. Across the full 21-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +15.16% annualized vs -2.76%.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.4% compared with 17.2% for IGD. 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 -82.5% for IGD and -53.5% 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 0.61. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.

Fees and Cost Over Time

IGD charges 0.96% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $96 vs $18 annually, a gap of $78 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IGD currently yields 9.15% against 0.44% for QQQ.

Holdings Overlap

IGD already in QQQ16.1%
QQQ already in IGD35.6%

16.1% of IGD's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 35.6% of QQQ's money is in holdings IGD also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

The two holdings books were reported 66 days apart, IGD as of May 31, 2026 and QQQ as of Aug 5, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.

20 positions in common, counted across the 241 positions we hold weights for in IGD and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 251 and 107.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 76 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for IGD (62.0% of the fund), and 121 for IGD that do not appear in QQQ (52.7%).

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

StockWeight in IGDWeight in QQQDifference
NVDANvidia Corp.0.57%8.44%7.87%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc.Class A3.73%3.36%0.37%
MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 370.59%5.76%5.17%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.1.42%4.43%3.01%
METAMeta Platform Inc 1.47%2.78%1.31%
CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares1.81%2.10%0.29%
AMATApplied Materials, Inc.0.36%1.86%1.50%
PEPPepsico Inc.0.91%0.83%0.08%
KLACKla Corp0.41%1.11%0.70%
QCOMQualcomm Inc.0.78%0.73%0.05%

35.6% of QQQ is already inside IGD.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

IGDQQQ

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, IGD or QQQ?

IGD has an expense ratio of 0.96% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $78 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, IGD or QQQ?

Over the past year IGD returned +20.59% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (21 years), IGD annualized -2.76% vs +15.16% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, IGD or QQQ?

QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 18.4% annualized versus 17.2% for IGD. Worst drawdown: IGD -82.5% vs QQQ -53.5%.

Should I hold both IGD and QQQ?

IGD and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.61, 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 IGD and QQQ?

35.6% of QQQ's money is in holdings IGD also owns. 35.6% of QQQ's is in holdings IGD also owns. They hold 20 positions in common, counted across the 241 positions we hold weights for in IGD and 102 in QQQ.

Which pays a higher dividend, IGD or QQQ?

IGD yields 9.15% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so IGD currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is QQQ better than IGD?

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IGD is less concentrated, with 15.8% 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.