Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

QQQM vs SPYG: how they differ

QQQM and SPYG hold 56% of their weight in the same names, and QQQM returned more over the year.

Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF and State Street(R) SPDR(R) Portfolio S&P 500(R) Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, QQQM and SPYG hold 56% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions QQQM and SPYG both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingQQQMSPYG
NVIDIA Corp8.52%14.85%
Apple Inc7.72%6.73%
Microsoft Corp5.89%10.27%
Amazon.com Inc4.36%3.67%
Alphabet Inc3.12%5.47%
Micron Technology Inc4.90%3.09%
Meta Platforms Inc3.07%3.97%
Alphabet Inc2.90%4.38%
Broadcom Inc2.75%4.80%
Advanced Micro Devices Inc3.65%2.31%
Tesla Inc2.92%1.78%
Palantir Technologies Inc1.69%1.07%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in QQQMOnly in SPYG
Walmart Inc 2.29%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC CL B 2.61%
Intel Corp 2.24%ELI LILLY + CO 2.49%
Costco Wholesale Corp 1.78%JPMORGAN CHASE + CO 1.81%
Space Exploration Technologies Corp 1.26%JOHNSON + JOHNSON 1.06%
Texas Instruments Inc 1.05%CATERPILLAR INC 1.04%
Linde PLC 0.95%VISA INC CLASS A SHARES 0.94%
T-Mobile US Inc 0.85%MASTERCARD INC A 0.86%
PepsiCo Inc 0.84%RTX 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 Sep 10, 2026.

QQQM and SPYG on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
SPYG
State Street(R) SPDR(R) Portfolio S&P 500(R) Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerInvescoState Street
What it isNasdaq-100SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth
Total return, 1 year+23.0%+17.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.5 pts+0.4 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.04%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%100.0%
Holdings106150

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 Sep 10, 2026, 97% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 106 positions, with the top ten at 47.1%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

SPYG in plain words

SPYG is an index equity fund tracking the SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 150 positions, with the top ten at 59.8%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, QQQM or SPYG?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, QQQM returned +23.0% and SPYG returned +17.9%, so QQQM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, QQQM or SPYG?
QQQM charges 0.15% a year and SPYG charges 0.04%, so SPYG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do QQQM and SPYG overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of QQQM and 100% of SPYG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 56% 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 SPYG, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 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 SPYG, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/qqqm-vs-spyg Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources