QQQ vs RMRC
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF
Which is better, QQQ or RMRC?
Large Cap Growth against Allocation/Balanced.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 94.0%.
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 | QQQ | RMRC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.50% |
| AUM | $483.5B | $10M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 0.58% |
| Holdings | 107 | 12 |
| YTD Return | +17.95%Best | +1.33% |
| 1Y Return | +21.77% | - |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.63% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +15.24% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 46.5%Best | 94.0% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Armor ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Allocation/Balanced |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Allocation/Balanced |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Feb 23, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
QQQ vs RMRC 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 RMRC Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and ARMOR Core Risk-Managed ETF (RMRC) is an ETF from Armor ETFs. Year to date, QQQ is up 17.95% versus a gain of 1.33% for RMRC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QQQ charges 0.18% per year while RMRC 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 0.58% for RMRC.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 102 holdings in QQQ and 11 in RMRC, totalling 99.9% and 99.8% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 11 in RMRC, against full books of 107 and 12.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 102 and 11 positions we hold weights for.
QQQ holds 96 positions RMRC does not, 97.5% of the fund.
Largest: NVDA 8.44%, AAPL 7.27%, MSFT 5.76%, AMZN 4.67%, MU 4.43%
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of QQQ and RMRC 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, QQQ or RMRC?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while RMRC charges 0.50%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or RMRC?
QQQ yields 0.44% while RMRC yields 0.58%, so RMRC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RMRC better than QQQ?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 94.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.