VOO vs QQQ Overlap AnalysisOverlap
Comparing Vanguard S&P 500 ETF and Invesco QQQ Trust
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 VOO wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: VOO wins with better expense ratio and number of holdings. Consider VOO for your portfolio, but QQQ is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
73 shared holdings representing 54.8% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | VOO Weight | QQQ Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA NVDA | 7.37% | 8.99% | 7.37% |
| 2 | AAPL AAPL | 7.07% | 7.94% | 7.07% |
| 3 | MSFT MSFT | 6.24% | 7.12% | 6.24% |
| 4 | AMZN AMZN | 3.86% | 4.87% | 3.86% |
| 5 | AVGO AVGO | 3.24% | 3.24% | 3.24% |
| 6 | GOOGL GOOGL | 3.18% | 3.58% | 3.18% |
| 7 | GOOG GOOG | 2.55% | 3.35% | 2.55% |
| 8 | META META | 2.40% | 3.85% | 2.40% |
| 9 | TSLA TSLA | 2.06% | 4.21% | 2.06% |
| 10 | NFLX NFLX | 0.78% | 2.15% | 0.78% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in VOO
Unique to VOO
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| BRK-B | BRK-B | 1.61% |
| LLY | LLY | 1.46% |
| JPM | JPM | 1.40% |
| V | V | 0.96% |
| JNJ | JNJ | 0.85% |
Top Holdings Only in QQQ
Unique to QQQ
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| PLTR | PLTR | 2.40% |
| AMD | AMD | 1.90% |
| MU | MU | 1.75% |
| CSCO | CSCO | 1.67% |
| LRCX | LRCX | 1.21% |
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.