KAMO vs QQQ
Kensington Credit Opportunities ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, KAMO or QQQ?
QQQ has been ahead.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y.
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 | KAMO | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.92% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $107M | $437.3B |
| Dividend Yield | 3.07% | 0.43% |
| Holdings | 6 | 208 |
| YTD Return | -4.01% | +12.98%Best |
| 1Y Return | -3.76% | +11.59%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +23.05% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.74% |
| Fund Family | Kensington Funds | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | - | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 16, 2025 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window, Top 10 Weight.
KAMO 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.
KAMO vs QQQ Performance
Kensington Credit Opportunities ETF (KAMO) is an ETF from Kensington Funds and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year KAMO returned -3.76% while QQQ returned +11.59%. Year to date, KAMO is down 4.01% versus a gain of 12.98% for QQQ.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
KAMO charges 0.92% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $92 vs $18 annually, a gap of $74 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, KAMO currently yields 3.07% against 0.43% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 4 holdings in KAMO and 101 in QQQ, totalling 99.4% and 99.7% 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 4 positions we hold weights for in KAMO and 101 in QQQ, against full books of 6 and 208.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of KAMO 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, KAMO or QQQ?
KAMO has an expense ratio of 0.92% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $74 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, KAMO or QQQ?
Over the past year KAMO returned -3.76% vs +11.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, KAMO or QQQ?
KAMO yields 3.07% while QQQ yields 0.43%, so KAMO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than KAMO?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.