QQQ vs TYLD

QQQ vs TYLD

Which is better, QQQ or TYLD?

QQQ has been ahead.

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window.

Lower Fees: QQQHigher Returns: QQQ

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

MetricQQQTYLD
Expense Ratio0.18%Best0.59%
AUM$483.5B$56M
Dividend Yield0.44%3.71%
Holdings1075
YTD Return+16.87%Best+1.31%
1Y Return+22.98%Best+2.63%
3Y Return (annualized)+24.98%-
5Y Return (annualized)+14.39%-
Volatility (annualized)17.2%0.8%Best
Max Drawdown-22.8%-8.2%Best
$10,000 over 2.7 years$18,342Best$10,171
Fund FamilyInvesco (US)Cambria Investment Management
CategoryEquityFixed Income
StyleLarge Cap Growth-
InceptionMar 10, 1999Jan 4, 2024

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 4, 2024 to Sep 11, 2026 (2.7 years).

QQQ vs TYLD 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 2.7 years both funds cover.

QQQ vs TYLD Performance

Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Cambria Tactical Yield ETF (TYLD) is an ETF from Cambria Investment Management. Over the past year QQQ returned +22.98% while TYLD returned +2.63%. Year to date, QQQ is up 16.87% versus a gain of 1.31% for TYLD.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.2% compared with 0.8% for TYLD. 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 -8.2% for TYLD. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.32. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.

Fees and Cost Over Time

QQQ charges 0.18% per year while TYLD charges 0.59%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $59 annually, a gap of $41 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.44% against 3.71% for TYLD.

Holdings Overlap

We hold position weights for 102 holdings in QQQ and 1 in TYLD, totalling 99.9% and 1.6% 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 1 in TYLD, against full books of 107 and 5.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of QQQ and TYLD you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

QQQTYLD

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, QQQ or TYLD?

QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while TYLD charges 0.59%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $41 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, QQQ or TYLD?

Over the past year QQQ returned +22.98% vs +2.63% for TYLD, 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 TYLD?

QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.2% annualized versus 0.8% for TYLD. Worst drawdown: QQQ -22.8% vs TYLD -8.2%.

Should I hold both QQQ and TYLD?

QQQ and TYLD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.32, 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 TYLD?

QQQ yields 0.44% while TYLD yields 3.71%, so TYLD currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is TYLD 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.