Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

ITOT vs QQQM: how they differ

ITOT and QQQM hold 47% of their weight in the same names, and QQQM returned more over the year.

iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ITOT and QQQM hold 47% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ITOT and QQQM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingITOTQQQM
NVIDIA Corp.6.64%8.16%
Apple, Inc.5.82%7.29%
Microsoft Corp.3.80%5.32%
Amazon.com, Inc.3.20%4.62%
Alphabet, Inc.2.87%3.52%
Broadcom, Inc.2.45%3.37%
Alphabet, Inc.2.29%3.26%
Micron Technology, Inc.1.78%4.80%
Meta Platforms, Inc.1.70%2.97%
Tesla, Inc.1.62%3.46%
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.1.30%3.70%
Intel Corp.0.90%2.52%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ITOTOnly in QQQM
Eli Lilly & Co. 1.30%Linde PLC 1.01%
Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. 1.26%Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.84%
JPMorgan Chase & Co. 1.20%Honeywell International Inc. 0.66%
Johnson & Johnson 0.84%Shopify Inc. 0.64%
Visa, Inc. 0.78%ASML Holding N.V. 0.62%
Exxon Mobil Corp. 0.78%MercadoLibre, Inc. 0.38%
Caterpillar, Inc. 0.67%NXP Semiconductors N.V. 0.36%
AbbVie, Inc. 0.61%PDD Holdings Inc. 0.25%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

ITOT and QQQM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ITOT
iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesInvesco
What it isCore S&P Total U.S. Stock MarketNasdaq-100
Total return, 1 year+17.2%+23.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.3 pts+5.5 pts
Expense ratio0.03%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50088.3%96.7%
Holdings2497101

ITOT in plain words

ITOT is an index equity fund tracking the Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 88% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2497 positions, with the top ten at 32.2%.

QQQM in plain words

QQQM is an index equity fund tracking the Nasdaq-100. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +23.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 97% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 101 positions, with the top ten at 47.5%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ITOT or QQQM?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ITOT returned +17.2% and QQQM returned +23.0%, so QQQM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ITOT or QQQM?
ITOT charges 0.03% a year and QQQM charges 0.15%, so ITOT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ITOT and QQQM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 88% of ITOT and 97% of QQQM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 47% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

ITOT against QQQM, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, ITOT against QQQM, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ITOT-QQQM Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources