IXP vs QQQ
iShares Global Comm Services ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, IXP or QQQ?
Large Cap Blend 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 66.1%.
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 | IXP | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.37% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $465M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 3.47% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 90 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +0.19% | +17.21%Best |
| 1Y Return | -1.82% | +22.10%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.83% | +25.27%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.52% | +14.60%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.6%Best | 19.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -53.1%Best | -53.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,050 | $19,766Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 66.1% | 46.5%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Nov 12, 2001 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 16, 2001 to Sep 17, 2026 (24.8 years).
IXP 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.
IXP vs QQQ Performance
iShares Global Comm Services ETF (IXP) 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 IXP returned -1.82% while QQQ returned +22.10%. Year to date, IXP is up 0.19% versus a gain of 17.21% for QQQ.
Over three years, IXP compounded at +21.83% per year against +25.27% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +8.52% and +14.60% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +12.54% annualized vs +3.73%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.4% compared with 16.6% for IXP. 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 -53.1% for IXP 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 0.74. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IXP charges 0.37% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $37 vs $18 annually, a gap of $19 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IXP currently yields 3.47% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
50.9% of IXP's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 12.9% of QQQ's money is in holdings IXP also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
9 positions in common, counted across the 66 positions we hold weights for in IXP and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 90 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 87 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for IXP (84.7% of the fund), and 18 for IXP that do not appear in QQQ (19.3%).
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 IXP | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 15.95% | 2.78% | 13.17% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 11.69% | 3.36% | 8.33% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 9.32% | 3.13% | 6.19% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 4.37% | 1.37% | 3.00% |
| TMUST-Mobile Usa Inc Esrw Usd Npv Ref Sm#585558 | 2.16% | 0.82% | 1.34% |
| CMCSAComcast Corp-class A Cmcsa | 2.43% | 0.39% | 2.04% |
| APPAppLovin Corp. Com Cl A | 2.16% | 0.56% | 1.60% |
| WBDWarner Bros. Discovery, Inc | 1.82% | 0.29% | 1.53% |
| TTWOTake-Two Interactive Software, Inc. | 0.98% | 0.19% | 0.79% |
50.9% of IXP is already inside QQQ.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IXP or QQQ?
IXP has an expense ratio of 0.37% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $19 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IXP or QQQ?
Over the past year IXP returned -1.82% vs +22.10% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), IXP annualized +3.73% vs +12.54% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IXP or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.4% annualized versus 16.6% for IXP. Worst drawdown: IXP -53.1% vs QQQ -53.5%.
Should I hold both IXP and QQQ?
IXP and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.74, 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 IXP and QQQ?
50.9% of IXP's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 12.9% of QQQ's is in holdings IXP also owns. They hold 9 positions in common, counted across the 66 positions we hold weights for in IXP and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, IXP or QQQ?
IXP yields 3.47% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so IXP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than IXP?
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 66.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.