PWZ vs QQQ
Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. PWZ offers more diversification with 1,175 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | PWZ | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.28% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $1.2B | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.73% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 1,175 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +0.77% | +15.47% | |
| 1Y Return | +7.09% | +24.44% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.02% | +25.47% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.23% | +14.22% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.0% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -24.7% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 11, 2007 | Mar 10, 1999 |
PWZ vs QQQ Performance
Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year PWZ returned +7.09% while QQQ returned +24.44%. Year to date, PWZ is up 0.77% versus a gain of 15.47% for QQQ.
Over three years, PWZ compounded at +3.02% per year against +25.47% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are -0.23% and +14.22% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +12.99% annualized vs +0.61%. 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 7.0% for PWZ. 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 -24.7% for PWZ 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 0.36. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
PWZ charges 0.28% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $28 vs $18 annually, a gap of $10 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, PWZ currently yields 3.73% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
PWZ and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 609 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, PWZ or QQQ?
PWZ has an expense ratio of 0.28% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $10 per year of difference.
Which performed better, PWZ or QQQ?
Over the past year PWZ returned +7.09% vs +24.44% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), PWZ annualized +0.61% vs +12.99% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, PWZ or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 7.0% for PWZ. Worst drawdown: PWZ -24.7% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both PWZ and QQQ?
PWZ and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.36, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between PWZ and QQQ?
PWZ and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 609 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, PWZ or QQQ?
PWZ yields 3.73% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so PWZ 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.