QQQ vs RSJN
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs FT Vest US Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - June
Which is better, QQQ or RSJN?
Large Cap Growth against Multi Alternative.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | RSJN |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.85% |
| AUM | $498.6B | $83M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.42% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 321 | 10 |
| YTD Return | +24.01%Best | +8.19% |
| 1Y Return | +25.94%Best | +10.33% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +28.16% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +16.56% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.3% | 7.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -22.8% | -12.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.3 years | $16,219Best | $12,319 |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Equity | Alternative |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Jun 21, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 24, 2024 to Oct 7, 2026 (2.3 years).
QQQ vs RSJN 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 covers the 2.3 years both funds cover.
QQQ vs RSJN Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and FT Vest US Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - June (RSJN) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year QQQ returned +25.94% while RSJN returned +10.33%. Year to date, QQQ is up 24.01% versus a gain of 8.19% for RSJN.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% compared with 7.3% for RSJN. 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 -22.8% for QQQ and -12.4% for RSJN. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.51. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QQQ charges 0.18% per year while RSJN charges 0.85%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $85 annually, a gap of $67 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.42% against 0.00% for RSJN.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of QQQ and RSJN 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 RSJN?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while RSJN charges 0.85%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $67 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QQQ or RSJN?
Over the past year QQQ returned +25.94% vs +10.33% for RSJN, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), QQQ annualized +23.40% vs +9.49% for RSJN. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QQQ or RSJN?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 7.3% for RSJN. Worst drawdown: QQQ -22.8% vs RSJN -12.4%.
Should I hold both QQQ and RSJN?
QQQ and RSJN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.51, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or RSJN?
QQQ yields 0.42% while RSJN yields 0.00%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RSJN better than QQQ?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.