IMCV vs QQQ
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Value ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, IMCV or QQQ?
Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Growth.
IMCV has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IMCV is less concentrated, with 12.5% 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 | IMCV | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.06%Best | 0.18% |
| AUM | $1.2B | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.78% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 275 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +16.95%Best | +16.87% |
| 1Y Return | +21.77% | +22.98%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.87% | +24.98%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.81% | +14.39%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.6%Best | 18.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -66.5% | -53.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,707 | $19,586Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 12.5%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 28, 2004 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 2, 2004 to Sep 11, 2026 (22.2 years).
IMCV 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 22.2 years both funds cover.
IMCV vs QQQ Performance
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Value ETF (IMCV) 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 IMCV returned +21.77% while QQQ returned +22.98%. Year to date, IMCV is up 16.95% versus a gain of 16.87% for QQQ.
Over three years, IMCV compounded at +17.87% per year against +24.98% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +10.81% and +14.39% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +14.47% annualized vs +7.94%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.3% compared with 17.6% for IMCV. 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 -66.5% for IMCV 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 0.72. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IMCV charges 0.06% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $6 vs $18 annually, a gap of $12 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IMCV currently yields 1.78% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
12.9% of IMCV's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 5.4% of QQQ's money is in holdings IMCV also owns.
IMCV and QQQ share little of their money.
22 positions in common, counted across the 270 positions we hold weights for in IMCV and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 275 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 73 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for IMCV (91.7% of the fund), and 236 for IMCV that do not appear in QQQ (84.0%).
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 IMCV | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADPAutomatic Data Processing, Inc. | 1.50% | 0.47% | 1.03% |
| MDLZMondelez International Inc. Class A | 1.12% | 0.35% | 0.77% |
| REGNRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 1.07% | 0.35% | 0.72% |
| PCARPaccar Inc. | 0.91% | 0.31% | 0.60% |
| WBDWarner Bros. Discovery, Inc | 0.85% | 0.29% | 0.56% |
| PYPLPaypal Holdings Inc | 0.71% | 0.22% | 0.49% |
| XELXcel Energy Inc. | 0.67% | 0.21% | 0.46% |
| EXCExelon Corp. | 0.65% | 0.21% | 0.44% |
| AEPAmerican Electric Power Co. Inc. | 0.55% | 0.30% | 0.25% |
| CSXCsx Corp. | 0.43% | 0.42% | 0.01% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IMCV 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, IMCV or QQQ?
IMCV has an expense ratio of 0.06% while QQQ charges 0.18%. IMCV is the cheaper option, by $12 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IMCV or QQQ?
Over the past year IMCV returned +21.77% vs +22.98% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), IMCV annualized +7.94% vs +14.47% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IMCV or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 18.3% annualized versus 17.6% for IMCV. Worst drawdown: IMCV -66.5% vs QQQ -53.5%.
Should I hold both IMCV and QQQ?
IMCV and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.72, 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 IMCV and QQQ?
12.9% of IMCV's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 5.4% of QQQ's is in holdings IMCV also owns. They hold 22 positions in common, counted across the 270 positions we hold weights for in IMCV and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, IMCV or QQQ?
IMCV yields 1.78% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so IMCV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than IMCV?
IMCV has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IMCV is less concentrated, with 12.5% 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.