QQQ vs XLK
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF
Which is better, QQQ or XLK?
Each has led over a different period.
XLK has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over the full window, XLK over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 64.1%.
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 | XLK |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18% | 0.08%Best |
| AUM | $437.3B | $109.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.43% | 0.47% |
| Holdings | 208 | 152 |
| YTD Return | +12.98% | +21.27%Best |
| 1Y Return | +11.59% | +19.62%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.05% | +25.85%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.74% | +16.97%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 30.5% | 23.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -83.0% | -82.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,213 | $21,896Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 46.9%Best | 64.1% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | State Street Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Dec 16, 1998 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 10, 1999 to Nov 11, 2026 (27.7 years).
QQQ vs XLK 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 27.7 years both funds cover.
QQQ vs XLK Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLK) is an ETF from State Street Investment Management. Over the past year QQQ returned +11.59% while XLK returned +19.62%. Year to date, QQQ is up 12.98% versus a gain of 21.27% for XLK.
Over three years, QQQ compounded at +23.05% per year against +25.85% for XLK; over five years the annualized figures are +12.74% and +16.97% respectively. Across the full 28-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +12.79% annualized vs +8.79%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.5% compared with 23.0% for XLK. 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 -82.0% for XLK. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.77. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QQQ charges 0.18% per year while XLK charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $8 annually, a gap of $10 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.43% against 0.47% for XLK.
Holdings Overlap
54.9% of QQQ's money is in holdings XLK also owns. 85.4% of XLK's money is in holdings QQQ also owns.
Most of XLK is already inside QQQ. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
35 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 74 in XLK, against full books of 208 and 152.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 38 positions for XLK that do not appear in our book for QQQ (13.8% of the fund), and 59 for QQQ that do not appear in XLK (42.3%).
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 XLK | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.05% | 15.51% | 7.46% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 7.68% | 13.34% | 5.66% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.16% | 10.53% | 4.37% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.90% | 5.13% | 1.23% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 4.47% | 4.41% | 0.06% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.52% | 4.63% | 2.11% |
| INTCIntel Corp. | 2.13% | 3.29% | 1.16% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc. | 1.96% | 2.41% | 0.45% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.84% | 2.45% | 0.61% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 1.47% | 2.41% | 0.94% |
85.4% of XLK 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 XLK?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while XLK charges 0.08%. XLK is the cheaper option, by $10 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QQQ or XLK?
Over the past year QQQ returned +11.59% vs +19.62% for XLK, so XLK leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (28 years), QQQ annualized +12.79% vs +8.79% for XLK. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QQQ or XLK?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.5% annualized versus 23.0% for XLK. Worst drawdown: QQQ -83.0% vs XLK -82.0%.
Should I hold both QQQ and XLK?
QQQ and XLK have a monthly-return correlation of 0.77, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between QQQ and XLK?
85.4% of XLK's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 85.4% of XLK's is in holdings QQQ also owns. They hold 35 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 74 in XLK.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or XLK?
QQQ yields 0.43% while XLK yields 0.47%, so XLK currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XLK better than QQQ?
XLK has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over the full window, XLK over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 64.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.