LFSC vs QQQ
F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. LFSC delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 103 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | LFSC | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.54% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $124M | $455.8B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.41% | |
| Holdings | 40 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +29.18% | +17.46% | |
| 1Y Return | +80.95% | +26.02% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +25.51% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.12% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 26.5% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -29.7% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Emerald ETF | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 30, 2024 | Mar 10, 1999 |
LFSC vs QQQ Performance
F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) is a ETF from Emerald ETF and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year LFSC returned +80.95% while QQQ returned +26.02%. Year to date, LFSC is up 29.18% versus a gain of 17.46% for QQQ.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 26.5% for LFSC. 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 -29.7% for LFSC 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 0.34. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LFSC charges 0.54% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $54 vs $18 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LFSC currently yields 0.00% against 0.41% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
LFSC and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 142 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, LFSC or QQQ?
LFSC has an expense ratio of 0.54% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $36 per year of difference.
Which performed better, LFSC or QQQ?
Over the past year LFSC returned +80.95% vs +26.02% for QQQ, so LFSC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), LFSC annualized +42.65% vs +13.08% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, LFSC or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 26.5% for LFSC. Worst drawdown: LFSC -29.7% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both LFSC and QQQ?
LFSC and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.34, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between LFSC and QQQ?
LFSC and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 142 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, LFSC or QQQ?
LFSC yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.41%, 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.