IWO vs QQQ
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. IWO delivered stronger 1-year returns. IWO offers more diversification with 1,125 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IWO | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.24% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $15.0B | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 1,125 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +18.45% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +30.86% | +27.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.06% | +25.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.21% | +14.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.6% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.3% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jul 24, 2000 | Mar 10, 1999 |
IWO vs QQQ Performance
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO) 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 IWO returned +30.86% while QQQ returned +27.27%. Year to date, IWO is up 18.45% versus a gain of 16.64% for QQQ.
Over three years, IWO compounded at +19.06% per year against +25.96% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +6.21% and +14.54% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.03% annualized vs +6.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 21.6% for IWO. 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 -60.3% for IWO 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 0.83. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IWO charges 0.24% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $24 vs $18 annually, a gap of $6 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IWO currently yields 0.44% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
IWO and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 1137 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, IWO or QQQ?
IWO has an expense ratio of 0.24% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $6 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IWO or QQQ?
Over the past year IWO returned +30.86% vs +27.27% for QQQ, so IWO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IWO annualized +6.61% vs +13.03% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IWO or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 21.6% for IWO. Worst drawdown: IWO -60.3% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both IWO and QQQ?
IWO and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IWO and QQQ?
IWO and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1137 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IWO or QQQ?
IWO yields 0.44% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ 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.