MINN vs QQQ
Mairs & Power Minnesota Municipal Bond ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, MINN or QQQ?
QQQ has been ahead.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 48.1%.
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 | MINN | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $51M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 3.14% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 127 | 107 |
| YTD Return | -6.46% | +17.95%Best |
| 1Y Return | -4.34% | +21.77%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +1.65% | +25.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -1.76% | +15.24%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.8%Best | 20.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.4%Best | -35.1% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $9,150 | $20,324Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 48.1% | 46.5%Best |
| Fund Family | Mairs & Power | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | - | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Mar 11, 2021 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 12, 2021 to Sep 18, 2026 (5.5 years).
MINN 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.
MINN vs QQQ Performance
Mairs & Power Minnesota Municipal Bond ETF (MINN) is an ETF from Mairs & Power and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year MINN returned -4.34% while QQQ returned +21.77%. Year to date, MINN is down 6.46% versus a gain of 17.95% for QQQ.
Over three years, MINN compounded at +1.65% per year against +25.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are -1.76% and +15.24% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +16.85% annualized vs -1.35%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.4% compared with 7.8% for MINN. 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 -18.4% for MINN and -35.1% 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 0.61. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MINN charges 0.25% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $25 vs $18 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MINN currently yields 3.14% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
50.7% of MINN's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 40.7% of QQQ's money is in holdings MINN also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
19 positions in common, counted across the 42 positions we hold weights for in MINN and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 127 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 78 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for MINN (57.5% of the fund), and 9 for MINN that do not appear in QQQ (16.7%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in MINN | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 7.31% | 8.44% | 1.13% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.93% | 5.76% | 0.17% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 5.37% | 4.67% | 0.70% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.40% | 3.16% | 0.24% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 2.31% | 3.45% | 1.14% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 2.32% | 3.36% | 1.04% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.75% | 2.78% | 0.03% |
| TTWOTake-Two Interactive Software, Inc. | 4.83% | 0.19% | 4.64% |
| WDCWestern Digital Corp Company Guar 11/28 3 | 2.18% | 0.79% | 1.39% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 0.86% | 1.86% | 1.00% |
50.7% of MINN is already inside QQQ.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, MINN or QQQ?
MINN has an expense ratio of 0.25% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $7 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, MINN or QQQ?
Over the past year MINN returned -4.34% vs +21.77% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), MINN annualized -1.35% vs +16.85% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, MINN or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 20.4% annualized versus 7.8% for MINN. Worst drawdown: MINN -18.4% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both MINN and QQQ?
MINN and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.61, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between MINN and QQQ?
50.7% of MINN's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 40.7% of QQQ's is in holdings MINN also owns. They hold 19 positions in common, counted across the 42 positions we hold weights for in MINN and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, MINN or QQQ?
MINN yields 3.14% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so MINN currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than MINN?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 48.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.