MNA vs QQQ
NYLIM Merger Arbitrage ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, MNA or QQQ?
Multi Alternative against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. MNA is less concentrated, with 33.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.5%.
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 | MNA | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.77% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $256M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 92 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +2.54% | +15.94%Best |
| 1Y Return | +3.11% | +20.44%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.79% | +24.86%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.45% | +14.26%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.8%Best | 17.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -16.7%Best | -35.1% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,287 | $19,475Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.7%Best | 46.5% |
| Fund Family | New York Life Investments | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Nov 17, 2009 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 17, 2009 to Sep 14, 2026 (16.8 years).
MNA 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.
MNA vs QQQ Performance
NYLIM Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) is an ETF from New York Life Investments and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year MNA returned +3.11% while QQQ returned +20.44%. Year to date, MNA is up 2.54% versus a gain of 15.94% for QQQ.
Over three years, MNA compounded at +5.79% per year against +24.86% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +2.45% and +14.26% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +18.10% annualized vs +2.69%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.6% compared with 4.8% for MNA. 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 -16.7% for MNA 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 0.33. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MNA charges 0.77% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $77 vs $18 annually, a gap of $59 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MNA currently yields 0.00% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
3.4% of MNA's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 0.3% of QQQ's money is in holdings MNA also owns.
MNA and QQQ share little of their money.
1 positions in common, counted across the 60 positions we hold weights for in MNA and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 92 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 95 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for MNA (97.3% of the fund), and 40 for MNA that do not appear in QQQ (62.5%).
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 MNA | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| WBDWarner Bros. Discovery, Inc | 3.38% | 0.29% | 3.09% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of MNA 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, MNA or QQQ?
MNA has an expense ratio of 0.77% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $59 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, MNA or QQQ?
Over the past year MNA returned +3.11% vs +20.44% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), MNA annualized +2.69% vs +18.10% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, MNA or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.6% annualized versus 4.8% for MNA. Worst drawdown: MNA -16.7% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both MNA and QQQ?
MNA and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.33, 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 MNA and QQQ?
3.4% of MNA's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 0.3% of QQQ's is in holdings MNA also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 60 positions we hold weights for in MNA and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, MNA or QQQ?
MNA yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than MNA?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. MNA is less concentrated, with 33.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.