DGRO vs QQQ: Complete Comparison
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust โ overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis
Visual Overlap
Price Performance
Historical price comparison over 3M
๐Performance Comparison
โ ๏ธRisk Metrics
Interpretation:
- ๐ Lower volatility = smoother ride
- โก Higher Sharpe/Sortino = better risk-adjusted returns
- โ ๏ธ Smaller max drawdown = less worst-case pain
- ๐ Beta > 1 = more volatile than S&P 500
โ๏ธHead-to-Head Comparison
๐ DGRO wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: DGRO wins with better expense ratio and number of holdings. Consider DGRO for your portfolio, but QQQ is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
34 shared holdings representing 22.2% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | DGRO Weight | QQQ Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AAPL AAPL | 3.33% | 7.94% | 3.33% |
| 2 | AVGO AVGO | 2.87% | 3.24% | 2.87% |
| 3 | MSFT MSFT | 2.85% | 7.12% | 2.85% |
| 4 | CSCO CSCO | 1.74% | 1.67% | 1.67% |
| 5 | PEP PEP | 1.82% | 1.06% | 1.06% |
| 6 | AMGN AMGN | 1.33% | 0.97% | 0.97% |
| 7 | QCOM QCOM | 0.95% | 1.01% | 0.95% |
| 8 | GILD GILD | 0.93% | 0.84% | 0.84% |
| 9 | CMCSA CMCSA | 0.87% | 0.59% | 0.59% |
| 10 | HON HON | 0.58% | 0.68% | 0.58% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in DGRO
Unique to DGRO
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| JNJ | JNJ | 3.22% |
| JPM | JPM | 3.07% |
| XOM | XOM | 3.02% |
| ABBV | ABBV | 2.80% |
| MRK | MRK | 2.11% |
Top Holdings Only in QQQ
Unique to QQQ
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NVDA | NVDA | 8.99% |
| AMZN | AMZN | 4.87% |
| TSLA | TSLA | 4.21% |
| META | META | 3.85% |
| GOOGL | GOOGL | 3.58% |
Price Correlation
How We Calculate Overlap
We use the minimum weight method with normalization to calculate portfolio overlap:
Overlap = ฮฃ min(weightA, weightB) for each shared holdingNormalization: Holdings weights are normalized to sum to 100% before comparison. This ensures accurate overlap calculations even when analyzing partial holdings data (e.g., top 50 positions).
Conservative approach: We consider only the smaller allocation for each shared position, giving you a realistic view of true portfolio overlap.
๐ This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.