QQQ vs RECS
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF
Quick Verdict
RECS has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. RECS offers more diversification with 368 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | QQQ | RECS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18% | 0.15% | |
| AUM | $496.3B | $5.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 1.03% | |
| Holdings | 108 | 368 | |
| YTD Return | +17.89% | +11.25% | |
| 1Y Return | +26.35% | +17.50% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +26.02% | +22.20% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.59% | +13.37% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 30.6% | 16.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -83.0% | -34.3% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Columbia Threadneedle Investments | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Sep 25, 2019 |
QQQ vs RECS Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) is a ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Over the past year QQQ returned +26.35% while RECS returned +17.50%. Year to date, QQQ is up 17.89% versus a gain of 11.25% for RECS.
Over three years, QQQ compounded at +26.02% per year against +22.20% for RECS; over five years the annualized figures are +14.59% and +13.37% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.07% annualized vs +4.03%. 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 16.6% for RECS. 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 -83.0% for QQQ and -34.3% for RECS. 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 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QQQ charges 0.18% per year while RECS charges 0.15%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $15 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.44% against 1.03% for RECS.
Holdings Overlap
QQQ and RECS share 32 holdings out of 430 unique holdings combined, representing a 38.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, QQQ or RECS?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while RECS charges 0.15%. RECS is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $3 per year of difference.
Which performed better, QQQ or RECS?
Over the past year QQQ returned +26.35% vs +17.50% for RECS, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), QQQ annualized +13.07% vs +4.03% for RECS. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, QQQ or RECS?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 16.6% for RECS. Worst drawdown: QQQ -83.0% vs RECS -34.3%.
Should I hold both QQQ and RECS?
QQQ and RECS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between QQQ and RECS?
QQQ and RECS share 32 common holdings with a 38.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 430 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or RECS?
QQQ yields 0.44% while RECS yields 1.03%, so RECS 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.