QQQ vs VEGN
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs US Vegan Climate ETF
Which is better, QQQ or VEGN?
Each has led over a different period.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 5Y and the full window, VEGN over 1Y and 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. VEGN is less concentrated, with 38.1% 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 | VEGN |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.60% |
| AUM | $498.6B | $187M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.42% | 0.50% |
| Holdings | 321 | 520 |
| YTD Return | +22.67% | +31.46%Best |
| 1Y Return | +24.33% | +34.31%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +29.05% | +29.45%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +17.00%Best | +16.06% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.5%Best | 20.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -35.1% | -34.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $21,924Best | $21,058 |
| Top 10 Weight | 47.2% | 38.1%Best |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Beyond Invesing |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Sep 9, 2019 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 10, 2019 to Oct 2, 2026 (7.1 years).
QQQ vs VEGN 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 7.1 years both funds cover.
QQQ vs VEGN Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and US Vegan Climate ETF (VEGN) is an ETF from Beyond Invesing. Over the past year QQQ returned +24.33% while VEGN returned +34.31%. Year to date, QQQ is up 22.67% versus a gain of 31.46% for VEGN.
Over three years, QQQ compounded at +29.05% per year against +29.45% for VEGN; over five years the annualized figures are +17.00% and +16.06% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +21.97% annualized vs +18.42%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VEGN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.6% compared with 20.5% 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 -35.1% for QQQ and -34.4% for VEGN. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. 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 VEGN charges 0.60%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $60 annually, a gap of $42 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.42% against 0.50% for VEGN.
Holdings Overlap
54.1% of QQQ's money is in holdings VEGN also owns. 55.5% of VEGN's money is in holdings QQQ also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
45 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 260 in VEGN, against full books of 321 and 520.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 199 positions for VEGN that do not appear in our book for QQQ (42.6% of the fund), and 50 for QQQ that do not appear in VEGN (43.6%).
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 VEGN | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.45% | 4.16% | 4.29% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.80% | 4.67% | 3.13% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 4.85% | 5.29% | 0.44% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.71% | 4.37% | 0.66% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.15% | 3.67% | 0.52% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.74% | 3.70% | 0.96% |
| INTCIntel Corporation | 2.28% | 2.78% | 0.50% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.95% | 2.80% | 0.85% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 1.64% | 2.67% | 1.03% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.60% | 2.66% | 1.06% |
55.5% of VEGN 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 VEGN?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while VEGN charges 0.60%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $42 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QQQ or VEGN?
Over the past year QQQ returned +24.33% vs +34.31% for VEGN, so VEGN leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), QQQ annualized +21.97% vs +18.42% for VEGN. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QQQ or VEGN?
VEGN has been the more volatile fund at 20.6% annualized versus 20.5% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: QQQ -35.1% vs VEGN -34.4%.
Should I hold both QQQ and VEGN?
QQQ and VEGN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 VEGN?
55.5% of VEGN's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 55.5% of VEGN's is in holdings QQQ also owns. They hold 45 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 260 in VEGN.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or VEGN?
QQQ yields 0.42% while VEGN yields 0.50%, so VEGN currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VEGN better than QQQ?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 5Y and the full window, VEGN over 1Y and 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. VEGN is less concentrated, with 38.1% 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.