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 VO: how they differ

QQQM and VO hold 10% of their weight in the same names, and QQQM returned more over the year.

Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF and Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, QQQM and VO hold 10% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions QQQM and VO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingQQQMVO
Seagate Technology Holdings PLC0.84%1.05%
Western Digital Corp.0.79%1.07%
Constellation Energy Corp.0.46%0.78%
Fortinet, Inc.0.45%0.46%
Datadog, Inc.0.36%0.84%
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.0.34%0.63%
Ross Stores, Inc.0.33%0.67%
American Electric Power Co., Inc.0.30%0.36%
Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc.0.29%0.62%
DoorDash, Inc.0.29%0.66%
Cintas Corp.0.30%0.28%
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.0.28%0.31%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in QQQMOnly in VO
NVIDIA Corp. 8.16%Vertiv Holdings Co 1.23%
Apple Inc. 7.29%Quanta Services Inc 1.05%
Microsoft Corp. 5.32%Howmet Aerospace Inc 1.04%
Micron Technology, Inc. 4.80%Cummins Inc 0.95%
Amazon.com, Inc. 4.62%Bloom Energy Corp 0.79%
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 3.70%Robinhood Markets Inc 0.77%
Alphabet Inc. 3.52%Cloudflare Inc 0.76%
Tesla, Inc. 3.46%Valero Energy Corp 0.75%

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.

QQQM and VO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerInvescoVanguard
What it isNasdaq-100Mid-Cap
Total return, 1 year+23.0%+12.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.5 pts−5.5 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%91.4%
Holdings101282

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.

VO in plain words

VO is an index equity fund tracking the Mid-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +12.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 282 positions, with the top ten at 9.6%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, QQQM or VO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, QQQM returned +23.0% and VO returned +12.0%, so QQQM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, QQQM or VO?
QQQM charges 0.15% a year and VO charges 0.03%, so VO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do QQQM and VO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of QQQM and 91% of VO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 10% 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 VO, 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 VO, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/QQQM-VO Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources