XLF vs QQQ Overlap AnalysisOverlap
Comparing Financial Select Sector SPDR Fund 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 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 XLF is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
1 shared holdings representing 0.3% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | XLF Weight | QQQ Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PYPL PYPL | 0.76% | 0.30% | 0.30% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in XLF
Unique to XLF
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| BRK-B | BRK-B | 11.80% |
| JPM | JPM | 10.82% |
| V | V | 7.26% |
| MA | MA | 5.81% |
| BAC | BAC | 4.78% |
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.