LMUB vs QQQ
iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
LMUB has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. LMUB offers more diversification with 783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | LMUB | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.09% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $1.6B | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.84% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 783 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +0.11% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +7.04% | +27.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +25.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +14.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.5% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -5.5% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 17, 2025 | Mar 10, 1999 |
LMUB vs QQQ Performance
iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF (LMUB) 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 LMUB returned +7.04% while QQQ returned +27.27%. Year to date, LMUB is up 0.11% versus a gain of 16.64% for QQQ.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 5.5% for LMUB. 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 -5.5% for LMUB 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 0.44. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LMUB charges 0.09% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $9 vs $18 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LMUB currently yields 3.84% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
LMUB and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 419 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, LMUB or QQQ?
LMUB has an expense ratio of 0.09% while QQQ charges 0.18%. LMUB is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $9 per year of difference.
Which performed better, LMUB or QQQ?
Over the past year LMUB returned +7.04% vs +27.27% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), LMUB annualized +2.73% vs +13.03% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, LMUB or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 5.5% for LMUB. Worst drawdown: LMUB -5.5% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both LMUB and QQQ?
LMUB and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.44, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between LMUB and QQQ?
LMUB and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 419 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, LMUB or QQQ?
LMUB yields 3.84% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so LMUB 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.