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

QQQM vs USMV: how they differ

QQQM and USMV hold 22% of their weight in the same names, and QQQM returned more over the year.

Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF and iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, QQQM and USMV hold 22% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions QQQM and USMV both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingQQQMUSMV
Cisco Systems, Inc.2.09%1.81%
NVIDIA Corp.8.16%1.64%
Microsoft Corp.5.32%1.56%
T-Mobile US, Inc.0.91%1.17%
Walmart Inc.2.48%0.88%
PepsiCo, Inc.0.87%1.02%
Apple Inc.7.29%0.82%
Texas Instruments Inc.1.22%0.78%
Gilead Sciences, Inc.0.73%0.82%
Linde PLC1.01%0.69%
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.3.70%0.53%
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.1.01%0.53%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in QQQMOnly in USMV
Alphabet Inc. 3.52%EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 1.60%
Tesla, Inc. 3.46%DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION 1.55%
Intel Corp. 2.52%THE SOUTHERN COMPANY 1.53%
Lam Research Corp. 1.75%AMPHENOL CORPORATION 1.51%
KLA Corp. 1.11%Chubb Limited 1.50%
Sandisk Corp. 1.10%VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. 1.49%
Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.84%WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC. 1.48%
Western Digital Corp. 0.79%MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. 1.46%

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 Apr 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

QQQM and USMV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
USMV
iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerInvescoiShares
What it isNasdaq-100MSCI USA Min Vol Factor
Total return, 1 year+23.0%+6.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.5 pts−10.9 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%94.8%
Holdings101170

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.

USMV in plain words

USMV is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Min Vol Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +6.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 170 positions, with the top ten at 15.7%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, QQQM or USMV?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, QQQM returned +23.0% and USMV returned +6.6%, so QQQM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, QQQM or USMV?
QQQM charges 0.15% a year and USMV charges 0.15%, so QQQM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do QQQM and USMV overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of QQQM and 95% of USMV by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 22% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources