QQQ vs SHRT
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Gotham Short Strategies ETF
Which is better, QQQ or SHRT?
Opposite sides of the same exposure.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two move opposite each other, correlation -0.62, so holding both offsets the exposure while paying both fees. SHRT is less concentrated, with 27.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%.
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 | SHRT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 1.35% |
| AUM | $498.6B | $13M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.42% | 0.08% |
| Holdings | 321 | 625 |
| YTD Return | +22.67%Best | -10.56% |
| 1Y Return | +24.33%Best | -8.28% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +29.05%Best | -6.48% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +17.00% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.6% | 12.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -22.8%Best | -27.8% |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $20,623Best | $8,234 |
| Top 10 Weight | 47.2% | 27.2%Best |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Gotham ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Nov 6, 2023 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 6, 2023 to Oct 2, 2026 (2.9 years).
QQQ vs SHRT 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 2.9 years both funds cover.
QQQ vs SHRT Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Gotham Short Strategies ETF (SHRT) is an ETF from Gotham ETFs. Over the past year QQQ returned +24.33% while SHRT returned -8.28%. Year to date, QQQ is up 22.67% versus a loss of 10.56% for SHRT.
Over three years, QQQ compounded at +29.05% per year against -6.48% for SHRT.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.6% compared with 12.9% for SHRT. 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 -27.8% for SHRT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at -0.62. They move opposite each other. Holding both offsets the exposure rather than spreading it, while paying both funds' fees.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QQQ charges 0.18% per year while SHRT charges 1.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $135 annually, a gap of $117 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.42% against 0.08% for SHRT.
Holdings Overlap
36.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings SHRT also owns. 6.4% of SHRT's money is in holdings QQQ also owns.
They hold the same names on opposite sides, so owning both offsets the exposure rather than doubling it.
24 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 372 in SHRT, against full books of 321 and 625.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 147 positions for SHRT that do not appear in our book for QQQ (83.8% of the fund), and 72 for QQQ that do not appear in SHRT (61.7%).
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
| Stock | Weight in QQQ | Weight in SHRT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.80% | -1.59% | 9.39% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.88% | -0.72% | 6.60% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.41% | -1.32% | 5.73% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 2.92% | -0.17% | 3.09% |
| TXNTexas Instrument Inc | 1.08% | 1.07% | 0.01% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.60% | 0.23% | 1.37% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.15% | -1.46% | 4.61% |
| MCHPMicrochip Technology Inc. | 0.18% | 1.44% | 1.26% |
| SBUXStarbucks Corp | 0.50% | 0.78% | 0.28% |
| HONHoneywell International Inc | 0.28% | 0.94% | 0.66% |
36.0% of QQQ is already inside SHRT.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, QQQ or SHRT?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while SHRT charges 1.35%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $117 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QQQ or SHRT?
Over the past year QQQ returned +24.33% vs -8.28% for SHRT, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QQQ or SHRT?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 16.6% annualized versus 12.9% for SHRT. Worst drawdown: QQQ -22.8% vs SHRT -27.8%.
Should I hold both QQQ and SHRT?
QQQ and SHRT have a monthly-return correlation of -0.62, so they move opposite each other. Holding both offsets the exposure rather than spreading it, and pays both funds' fees on the way. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between QQQ and SHRT?
36.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings SHRT also owns. 6.4% of SHRT's is in holdings QQQ also owns. They hold 24 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 372 in SHRT.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or SHRT?
QQQ yields 0.42% while SHRT yields 0.08%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SHRT better than QQQ?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two move opposite each other, correlation -0.62, so holding both offsets the exposure while paying both fees. SHRT is less concentrated, with 27.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.