QQQ vs RKSG

QQQ vs RKSG

Which is better, QQQ or RKSG?

QQQ costs less.

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. RKSG is less concentrated, with 43.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.5%.

Lower Fees: QQQLess Concentrated: RKSG

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

MetricQQQRKSG
Expense Ratio0.18%Best0.50%
AUM$483.5B$3M
Dividend Yield0.44%0.00%
Holdings107244
YTD Return+21.71%Best+13.55%
1Y Return+25.89%-
3Y Return (annualized)+28.80%-
5Y Return (annualized)+15.67%-
Top 10 Weight46.5%43.5%Best
Fund FamilyInvesco (US)Ruk Funds Management, LLC
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap GrowthLarge Cap Growth
InceptionMar 10, 1999Mar 31, 2026

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

QQQ vs RKSG 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.

QQQ vs RKSG Performance

Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Ruk Strategic Growth ETF (RKSG) is an ETF from Ruk Funds Management, LLC. Year to date, QQQ is up 21.71% versus a gain of 13.55% for RKSG.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

QQQ charges 0.18% per year while RKSG charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $50 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.44% against 0.00% for RKSG.

Holdings Overlap

QQQ already in RKSG80.8%
RKSG already in QQQ48.2%

80.8% of QQQ's money is in holdings RKSG also owns. 48.2% of RKSG's money is in holdings QQQ also owns.

Most of QQQ is already inside RKSG. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

63 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 235 in RKSG, against full books of 107 and 244.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 163 positions for RKSG that do not appear in our book for QQQ (48.2% of the fund), and 33 for QQQ that do not appear in RKSG (16.8%).

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

StockWeight in QQQWeight in RKSGDifference
NVDANvidia Corp8.44%10.84%2.40%
AAPLApple, Inc7.27%7.47%0.20%
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.76%4.62%1.14%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A3.36%5.68%2.32%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc4.67%2.61%2.06%
AVGOBroadcom Inc3.16%2.36%0.80%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.4.43%0.13%4.30%
METAMeta Platforms Inc2.78%1.38%1.40%
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc3.45%0.10%3.35%
TSLATesla Inc2.56%0.12%2.44%

80.8% of QQQ is already inside RKSG.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

QQQRKSG

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, QQQ or RKSG?

QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while RKSG charges 0.50%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between QQQ and RKSG?

80.8% of QQQ's money is in holdings RKSG also owns. 48.2% of RKSG's is in holdings QQQ also owns. They hold 63 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 235 in RKSG.

Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or RKSG?

QQQ yields 0.44% while RKSG yields 0.00%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is RKSG better than QQQ?

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. RKSG is less concentrated, with 43.5% 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.