QQQ vs XT
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF
Which is better, QQQ or XT?
Each has led over a different period.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, XT over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. XT is less concentrated, with 33.8% 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 | XT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.46% |
| AUM | $483.5B | $3.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 6.87% |
| Holdings | 107 | 226 |
| YTD Return | +17.95%Best | +17.67% |
| 1Y Return | +21.77% | +24.34%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.63%Best | +18.73% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +15.24%Best | +7.29% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.7% | 17.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -35.1% | -34.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $20,324Best | $14,217 |
| Top 10 Weight | 46.5% | 33.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Mar 10, 1999 | Mar 19, 2015 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 24, 2015 to Sep 18, 2026 (11.5 years).
QQQ vs XT 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 11.5 years both funds cover.
QQQ vs XT Performance
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF (XT) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year QQQ returned +21.77% while XT returned +24.34%. Year to date, QQQ is up 17.95% versus a gain of 17.67% for XT.
Over three years, QQQ compounded at +25.63% per year against +18.73% for XT; over five years the annualized figures are +15.24% and +7.29% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +18.32% annualized vs +11.67%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.7% compared with 17.3% for XT. 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 XT. 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 XT charges 0.46%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $46 annually, a gap of $28 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QQQ currently yields 0.44% against 6.87% for XT.
Holdings Overlap
54.9% of QQQ's money is in holdings XT also owns. 44.9% of XT's money is in holdings QQQ also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
32 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 194 in XT, against full books of 107 and 226.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 65 positions for XT that do not appear in our book for QQQ (28.8% of the fund), and 64 for QQQ that do not appear in XT (42.6%).
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 XT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.44% | 4.12% | 4.32% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.76% | 4.23% | 1.53% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.67% | 2.89% | 1.78% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 2.56% | 3.50% | 0.94% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 4.43% | 1.13% | 3.30% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.36% | 2.12% | 1.24% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.16% | 1.99% | 1.17% |
| TXNTexas Instrument Inc | 1.12% | 3.49% | 2.37% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc | 1.30% | 3.02% | 1.72% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.45% | 0.83% | 2.62% |
54.9% of QQQ is already inside XT.
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 XT?
QQQ has an expense ratio of 0.18% while XT charges 0.46%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $28 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QQQ or XT?
Over the past year QQQ returned +21.77% vs +24.34% for XT, so XT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), QQQ annualized +18.32% vs +11.67% for XT. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QQQ or XT?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 18.7% annualized versus 17.3% for XT. Worst drawdown: QQQ -35.1% vs XT -34.4%.
Should I hold both QQQ and XT?
QQQ and XT 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 XT?
54.9% of QQQ's money is in holdings XT also owns. 44.9% of XT's is in holdings QQQ also owns. They hold 32 positions in common, counted across the 102 positions we hold weights for in QQQ and 194 in XT.
Which pays a higher dividend, QQQ or XT?
QQQ yields 0.44% while XT yields 6.87%, so XT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XT better than QQQ?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, XT over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. XT is less concentrated, with 33.8% 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.