JSI vs QQQ

JSI vs QQQ

Which is better, JSI or QQQ?

QQQ has been ahead.

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window.

Lower Fees: QQQHigher Returns: QQQ

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

MetricJSIQQQ
Expense Ratio0.50%0.18%Best
AUM$1.5B$483.5B
Dividend Yield6.49%0.44%
Holdings588107
YTD Return+0.49%+16.87%Best
1Y Return+2.16%+22.98%Best
3Y Return (annualized)-+24.98%
5Y Return (annualized)-+14.39%
Volatility (annualized)2.6%Best16.8%
Max Drawdown-2.3%Best-22.8%
$10,000 over 2.8 years$11,869$19,446Best
Fund FamilyJanus Henderson InvestorsInvesco (US)
CategoryFixed IncomeEquity
Style-Large Cap Growth
InceptionNov 8, 2023Mar 10, 1999

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 9, 2023 to Sep 11, 2026 (2.8 years).

JSI 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 2.8 years both funds cover.

JSI vs QQQ Performance

Janus Henderson Securitized Income ETF (JSI) is an ETF from Janus Henderson Investors and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year JSI returned +2.16% while QQQ returned +22.98%. Year to date, JSI is up 0.49% versus a gain of 16.87% for QQQ.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.8% compared with 2.6% for JSI. 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 -2.3% for JSI and -22.8% 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 0.24. They move largely independently of each other.

Fees and Cost Over Time

JSI charges 0.50% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $50 vs $18 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, JSI currently yields 6.49% against 0.44% for QQQ.

Holdings Overlap

We hold position weights for 129 holdings in JSI and 102 in QQQ, totalling 49.0% and 99.9% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.

0 positions in common, counted across the 129 positions we hold weights for in JSI and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 588 and 107.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of JSI and QQQ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

JSIQQQ

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, JSI or QQQ?

JSI has an expense ratio of 0.50% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, JSI or QQQ?

Over the past year JSI returned +2.16% vs +22.98% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, JSI or QQQ?

QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 16.8% annualized versus 2.6% for JSI. Worst drawdown: JSI -2.3% vs QQQ -22.8%.

Should I hold both JSI and QQQ?

JSI and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.24, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which pays a higher dividend, JSI or QQQ?

JSI yields 6.49% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so JSI currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is QQQ better than JSI?

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.