QQQ vs TRFK
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Pacer Data and Digital Revolution ETF
Which is better, QQQ or TRFK?
Large Cap Growth against All Cap Blend.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. TRFK led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.0%.
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 | TRFK |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.49% |
| AUM | $486.1B | $1.0B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 0.01% |
| Holdings | 107 | 100 |
| YTD Return | +17.44% | +50.90%Best |
| 1Y Return | +24.69% | +54.84%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.76% | +45.04%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.22% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.5%Best | 30.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -22.8%Best | -29.1% |
| $10,000 over 4.2 years | $24,382 | $39,201Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 46.5%Best | 53.0% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Pacer ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | All Cap Blend |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Jun 8, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 9, 2022 to Sep 8, 2026 (4.2 years).
QQQ vs TRFK 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 4.2 years both funds cover.
QQQ vs TRFK Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Pacer Data and Digital Revolution ETF (TRFK) is an ETF from Pacer ETFs. Over the past year QQQ returned +24.69% while TRFK returned +54.84%. Year to date, QQQ is up 17.44% versus a gain of 50.90% for TRFK.
Over three years, QQQ compounded at +24.76% per year against +45.04% for TRFK. Across the full 4-year window we track, TRFK has the edge at +38.44% annualized vs +23.64%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TRFK has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.0% compared with 19.5% for QQQ. 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 -29.1% for TRFK. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QQQ charges 0.18% per year while TRFK charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $49 annually, a gap of $31 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.44% against 0.01% for TRFK.
Holdings Overlap
32.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings TRFK also owns. 62.3% of TRFK's money is in holdings QQQ also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
18 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 95 in TRFK, against full books of 107 and 100.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 53 positions for TRFK that do not appear in our book for QQQ (22.8% of the fund), and 77 for QQQ that do not appear in TRFK (65.4%).
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 TRFK | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 8.44% | 9.13% | 0.69% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.16% | 9.01% | 5.85% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 4.43% | 6.49% | 2.06% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.45% | 5.45% | 2.00% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc | 2.10% | 4.58% | 2.48% |
| INTCIntel Corp. | 2.23% | 3.27% | 1.04% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks Inc - Common | 1.30% | 3.49% | 2.19% |
| ARM:LNARM Holdings PLC - ADR | 0.51% | 3.47% | 2.96% |
| CRWDCrowdstrike Holdings Inc - A | 0.94% | 2.50% | 1.56% |
| SNDKSandisk Corp | 0.88% | 2.46% | 1.58% |
62.3% of TRFK is already inside QQQ.
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 TRFK?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while TRFK charges 0.49%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $31 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QQQ or TRFK?
Over the past year QQQ returned +24.69% vs +54.84% for TRFK, so TRFK leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), QQQ annualized +23.64% vs +38.44% for TRFK. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QQQ or TRFK?
TRFK has been the more volatile fund at 30.0% annualized versus 19.5% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: QQQ -22.8% vs TRFK -29.1%.
Should I hold both QQQ and TRFK?
QQQ and TRFK have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between QQQ and TRFK?
62.3% of TRFK's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 62.3% of TRFK's is in holdings QQQ also owns. They hold 18 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 95 in TRFK.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or TRFK?
QQQ yields 0.44% while TRFK yields 0.01%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TRFK better than QQQ?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. TRFK led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.