HDV vs QQQ: Complete Comparison
iShares Core High Dividend 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 QQQ wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: QQQ wins with better number of holdings and 5-year return. Consider QQQ for your portfolio, but HDV is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
9 shared holdings representing 6.2% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | HDV Weight | QQQ Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CSCO CSCO | 3.83% | 1.67% | 1.67% |
| 2 | PEP PEP | 4.00% | 1.06% | 1.06% |
| 3 | TXN TXN | 2.41% | 0.87% | 0.87% |
| 4 | GILD GILD | 2.06% | 0.84% | 0.84% |
| 5 | SBUX SBUX | 1.37% | 0.52% | 0.52% |
| 6 | MDLZ MDLZ | 1.08% | 0.38% | 0.38% |
| 7 | AEP AEP | 1.03% | 0.33% | 0.33% |
| 8 | XEL XEL | 0.69% | 0.24% | 0.24% |
| 9 | PAYX PAYX | 0.58% | 0.22% | 0.22% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in HDV
Unique to HDV
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| XOM | XOM | 8.90% |
| JNJ | JNJ | 7.09% |
| CVX | CVX | 6.26% |
| ABBV | ABBV | 6.16% |
| MRK | MRK | 4.64% |
Top Holdings Only in QQQ
Unique to QQQ
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NVDA | NVDA | 8.99% |
| AAPL | AAPL | 7.94% |
| MSFT | MSFT | 7.12% |
| AMZN | AMZN | 4.87% |
| TSLA | TSLA | 4.21% |
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.