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 XLV: how they differ

QQQM and XLV hold 4% of their weight in the same names, and QQQM returned more over the year.

Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF and State Street(R) Health Care Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, QQQM and XLV hold 4% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions QQQM and XLV both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingQQQMXLV
Amgen Inc0.92%3.46%
Gilead Sciences Inc0.80%3.01%
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc0.58%2.19%
Intuitive Surgical Inc0.57%2.14%
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc0.36%1.33%
IDEXX Laboratories Inc0.18%0.67%
Dexcom Inc0.14%0.55%
GE HealthCare Technologies Inc0.13%0.49%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in QQQMOnly in XLV
NVIDIA Corp 8.52%ELI LILLY + CO 14.87%
Apple Inc 7.72%JOHNSON + JOHNSON 10.73%
Microsoft Corp 5.89%ABBVIE INC 7.54%
Micron Technology Inc 4.90%MERCK + CO. INC. 5.98%
Amazon.com Inc 4.36%UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 5.90%
Advanced Micro Devices Inc 3.65%THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INC 3.75%
Alphabet Inc 3.12%ABBOTT LABORATORIES 3.01%
Meta Platforms Inc 3.07%PFIZER INC 2.64%

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 XLV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
XLV
State Street(R) Health Care Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerInvescoState Street
What it isNasdaq-100Health care
Total return, 1 year+23.0%+20.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.5 pts+2.9 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%100.0%
Holdings10663

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.

XLV in plain words

XLV is an index equity fund tracking the Health care. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +20.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% 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 63 positions, with the top ten at 60.9%. It sat 5.9% below its high of Aug 19, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, QQQM or XLV?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, QQQM returned +23.0% and XLV returned +20.4%, so QQQM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, QQQM or XLV?
QQQM charges 0.15% a year and XLV charges 0.08%, so XLV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do QQQM and XLV overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of QQQM and 100% of XLV by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 4% 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 XLV, 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 XLV, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/qqqm-vs-xlv Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources