MCR vs QQQ
MFS Charter Income Trust vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, MCR or QQQ?
Diversified Sectoral Bond against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | MCR | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.02% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $270M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 8.17% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 1,076 | 107 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.9%Best | 30.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -45.2%Best | -83.0% |
| $10,000 over 27.3 years | $9,442 | $300,149Best |
| Fund Family | MFS Investment Management | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | Diversified Sectoral Bond | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 20, 1989 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
The two price series end 90 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. MCR has data through Jun 18, 2026 and QQQ through Sep 16, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 27.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 10, 1999 to Jun 18, 2026 (27.3 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.7% compared with 9.9% for MCR. 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 -45.2% for MCR and -83.0% 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 0.26. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MCR charges 1.02% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $102 vs $18 annually, a gap of $84 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MCR currently yields 8.17% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
At least 0.8% of QQQ's money is in holdings MCR also owns.
Stated as a floor: for MCR, our book for it covers 90.1% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
We cannot see either book well enough to say how much of this pair is duplicated.
The two holdings books were reported 158 days apart, MCR as of Feb 28, 2026 and QQQ as of Aug 5, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
1 positions in common, counted across the 549 positions we hold weights for in MCR and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 1,076 and 107.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in MCR | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TMUST-Mobile Us Inc Com Usd0.00001 | 0.02% | 0.82% | 0.80% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of MCR 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, MCR or QQQ?
MCR has an expense ratio of 1.02% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $84 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, MCR or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.7% annualized versus 9.9% for MCR. Worst drawdown: MCR -45.2% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both MCR and QQQ?
MCR and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.26, 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, MCR or QQQ?
MCR yields 8.17% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so MCR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than MCR?
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.