QQQ vs USNZ
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Xtrackers Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned US Equity ETF
Which is better, QQQ or USNZ?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
USNZ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. USNZ is less concentrated, with 44.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.5%.
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 | USNZ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18% | 0.10%Best |
| AUM | $483.5B | $297M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 0.93% |
| Holdings | 107 | 310 |
| YTD Return | +21.71%Best | +14.49% |
| 1Y Return | +25.89%Best | +19.12% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +28.80%Best | +23.08% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +15.67% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.5% | 15.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -22.8% | -19.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 4.2 years | $26,635Best | $20,969 |
| Top 10 Weight | 46.5% | 44.7%Best |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Xtrackers ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Jun 27, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 28, 2022 to Sep 25, 2026 (4.2 years).
QQQ vs USNZ 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 USNZ Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Xtrackers Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned US Equity ETF (USNZ) is an ETF from Xtrackers ETFs. Over the past year QQQ returned +25.89% while USNZ returned +19.12%. Year to date, QQQ is up 21.71% versus a gain of 14.49% for USNZ.
Over three years, QQQ compounded at +28.80% per year against +23.08% for USNZ. Across the full 4-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +26.27% annualized vs +19.28%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.5% compared with 15.2% for USNZ. 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 -19.2% for USNZ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.92. 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 USNZ charges 0.10%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $10 annually, a gap of $8 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.44% against 0.93% for USNZ.
Holdings Overlap
86.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings USNZ also owns. 61.6% of USNZ's money is in holdings QQQ also owns.
Most of QQQ is already inside USNZ. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
77 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 297 in USNZ, against full books of 107 and 310.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 207 positions for USNZ that do not appear in our book for QQQ (37.7% of the fund), and 19 for QQQ that do not appear in USNZ (11.6%).
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 USNZ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.44% | 10.02% | 1.58% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.27% | 8.88% | 1.61% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.76% | 6.72% | 0.96% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.67% | 3.89% | 0.78% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.36% | 3.53% | 0.17% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 4.43% | 1.76% | 2.67% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.16% | 3.00% | 0.16% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 3.13% | 2.97% | 0.16% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.78% | 2.15% | 0.63% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.45% | 1.22% | 2.23% |
86.0% of QQQ is already inside USNZ.
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 USNZ?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while USNZ charges 0.10%. USNZ is the cheaper option, by $8 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QQQ or USNZ?
Over the past year QQQ returned +25.89% vs +19.12% for USNZ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), QQQ annualized +26.27% vs +19.28% for USNZ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QQQ or USNZ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.5% annualized versus 15.2% for USNZ. Worst drawdown: QQQ -22.8% vs USNZ -19.2%.
Should I hold both QQQ and USNZ?
QQQ and USNZ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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 USNZ?
86.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings USNZ also owns. 61.6% of USNZ's is in holdings QQQ also owns. They hold 77 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 297 in USNZ.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or USNZ?
QQQ yields 0.44% while USNZ yields 0.93%, so USNZ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is USNZ better than QQQ?
USNZ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. USNZ is less concentrated, with 44.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.