MUST vs QQQ
Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. MUST offers more diversification with 645 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | MUST | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.23% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $599M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.40% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 645 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | -0.04% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +4.65% | +27.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.38% | +25.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.32% | +14.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 6.0% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -13.8% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Columbia Threadneedle Investments | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 10, 2018 | Mar 10, 1999 |
MUST vs QQQ Performance
Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) is a ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year MUST returned +4.65% while QQQ returned +27.27%. Year to date, MUST is down 0.04% versus a gain of 16.64% for QQQ.
Over three years, MUST compounded at +3.38% per year against +25.96% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +0.32% and +14.54% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.03% annualized vs +1.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 6.0% for MUST. 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 -13.8% for MUST 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 0.50. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MUST charges 0.23% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $23 vs $18 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MUST currently yields 3.40% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
MUST and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 476 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, MUST or QQQ?
MUST has an expense ratio of 0.23% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $5 per year of difference.
Which performed better, MUST or QQQ?
Over the past year MUST returned +4.65% vs +27.27% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), MUST annualized +1.96% vs +13.03% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, MUST or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 6.0% for MUST. Worst drawdown: MUST -13.8% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both MUST and QQQ?
MUST and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.50, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between MUST and QQQ?
MUST and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 476 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, MUST or QQQ?
MUST yields 3.40% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so MUST 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.