QQQ vs WOOD
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 108 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | QQQ | WOOD | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18% | 0.39% | |
| AUM | $496.3B | $268M | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 2.34% | |
| Holdings | 108 | 48 | |
| YTD Return | +16.19% | +0.59% | |
| 1Y Return | +25.22% | -2.70% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.47% | +1.37% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.34% | -2.13% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 30.6% | 22.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -83.0% | -63.8% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Jun 24, 2008 |
QQQ vs WOOD Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year QQQ returned +25.22% while WOOD returned -2.70%. Year to date, QQQ is up 16.19% versus a gain of 0.59% for WOOD.
Over three years, QQQ compounded at +25.47% per year against +1.37% for WOOD; over five years the annualized figures are +14.34% and -2.13% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.01% annualized vs +2.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 22.5% for WOOD. 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 -83.0% for QQQ and -63.8% for WOOD. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.68. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QQQ charges 0.18% per year while WOOD charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $39 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.44% against 2.34% for WOOD.
Holdings Overlap
QQQ and WOOD share 0 holdings out of 128 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, QQQ or WOOD?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while WOOD charges 0.39%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $21 per year of difference.
Which performed better, QQQ or WOOD?
Over the past year QQQ returned +25.22% vs -2.70% for WOOD, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), QQQ annualized +13.01% vs +2.80% for WOOD. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, QQQ or WOOD?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 22.5% for WOOD. Worst drawdown: QQQ -83.0% vs WOOD -63.8%.
Should I hold both QQQ and WOOD?
QQQ and WOOD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.68, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between QQQ and WOOD?
QQQ and WOOD share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 128 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or WOOD?
QQQ yields 0.44% while WOOD yields 2.34%, so WOOD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.