Wealthy PotQQQM vs SCHG: 59% the Same, and SCHG Is the More Top-Heavy One
Table of Contents
The Short Answer
- The overlap is 59%. Matching both funds' SEC holdings filings for 31 May 2026, the smaller weight of every shared position adds up to 59.4%. They had 46 companies in common, and those 46 were 65% of QQQM and 72% of SCHG.
- SCHG costs less than a third as much. 0.04% a year against 0.15%: $4 against $15 on every $10,000, or $51 against $192 over ten years in each prospectus's own cost example.
- SCHG is the more concentrated fund, not QQQM. Its ten largest companies were 60.1% of the fund against QQQM's 50.3%. The Nasdaq-100's weighting rules trim the giants; SCHG's cap-weighted growth index lets them run.
- QQQM has returned more. To 30 June 2026, 16.52% a year over five years against SCHG's 13.69%. QQQM is too young for a ten-year figure; QQQ, which tracks the same index, returned 22.07% a year against SCHG's 18.66%.
- The real difference is which stocks fill the other 40%. QQQM adds Micron, Intel, Walmart, Cisco and a stack of chipmakers. SCHG adds Eli Lilly, Visa, Mastercard, UnitedHealth and GE.
- Pick one, not both. They are two versions of the same large-cap growth bet. Owning both mostly doubles NVIDIA, Apple, Alphabet and Microsoft.
How Much QQQM and SCHG Share
Both funds file a complete list of holdings with the SEC every quarter, and for this pair the most recent filings fall on the same day, 31 May 2026. We matched them company by company with the same data and method the site's Portfolio Overlap Checker uses.
| Holdings at 31 May 2026 | QQQM | SCHG |
|---|---|---|
| Companies held | 102 | 192 |
| Companies held by both | 46 | |
| Overlap (smaller weight of each shared holding, summed) | 59.4% | |
| Share of the fund in companies the other fund also owns | 64.8% | 71.8% |
| Share of the fund in companies the other fund does not own | 35.1% (56 names) | 28.2% (146 names) |
The shared part is the part everyone already knows: NVIDIA, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla, Broadcom, Meta and AMD sit near the top of both. The interesting part is what each fund holds that the other does not.
QQQM's unique 35% is mostly companies that are big and listed on Nasdaq but not classed as growth stocks by Dow Jones. The largest were Micron (4.78% of QQQM), Intel (2.51%), Walmart (2.47%), Cisco (2.08%), Lam Research (1.74%), Applied Materials (1.56%), Texas Instruments (1.21%) and Qualcomm (1.17%). That is a heavy dose of semiconductors plus some steady old names.
SCHG's unique 28% is growth stocks that happen not to be on Nasdaq, or are financials, which the Nasdaq-100 excludes by rule. The largest were Eli Lilly (3.05% of SCHG), Visa (1.92%), Mastercard (1.40%), UnitedHealth (1.20%), General Electric (1.18%) and GE Vernova (0.91%).
So the choice is not "tech fund versus diversified fund". Both are built around the same mega-caps. QQQM leans into chipmakers and Nasdaq-listed consumer names; SCHG reaches across exchanges for drug makers, payment networks and industrials.
QQQM vs SCHG Side by Side
| QQQM | SCHG | |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF | Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF |
| Index | Nasdaq-100 Index | Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index |
| How the index picks stocks | 100 of the largest non-financial companies listed on Nasdaq-affiliated exchanges | Stocks ranked 1 to 750 by market value that are classed as "growth" |
| Weighting | Modified market cap, with caps on the largest weights | Capped market cap, aligned with fund diversification rules |
| Expense ratio | 0.15% | 0.04% |
| Prospectus cost on $10,000, 10 years | $192 | $51 |
| Holdings | 103 (2 Oct 2026) | 189 (1 Oct 2026) |
| Ten largest companies, share of fund | 50.3% (31 May 2026) | 60.1% (31 May 2026) |
| Largest sector (GICS, 28 Feb 2026) | Information Technology 49.9% | Information Technology 42.6% |
| Net assets | $111.67bn (2 Oct 2026) | $64.72bn (2 Oct 2026) |
| 30-day SEC yield | 0.42% (1 Oct 2026) | 0.36% (1 Oct 2026) |
| Inception | 13 Oct 2020 | 11 Dec 2009 |
| Exchange | Nasdaq | NYSE Arca |
The fee gap in dollars. Eleven basis points is $11 a year on $10,000 and $110 on $100,000. It compounds, but it is small next to the return differences below, which have run to several points a year in both directions over short periods. If you want the Nasdaq-100 itself, QQQM is the cheaper of Invesco's two big Nasdaq-100 ETFs; QQQ charges 0.18% for the same index.
The Concentration Surprise
The usual line is that QQQM is the concentrated, tech-heavy bet and SCHG the diversified one because it holds nearly twice as many stocks. The filings say the opposite about concentration.
| Share of the fund in its largest companies, 31 May 2026 | QQQM | SCHG |
|---|---|---|
| Largest 10 | 50.27% | 60.12% |
| Largest 25 | 73.14% | 75.76% |
| Largest 50 | 88.43% | 85.83% |
| NVIDIA | 8.13% | 11.01% |
| Apple | 7.26% | 9.83% |
| Alphabet (both share classes) | 6.75% | 8.53% |
| Microsoft | 5.30% | 7.17% |
Why? The Nasdaq-100 is not a pure market-cap index. Invesco's prospectus calls it "modified market capitalization-weighted" and states that no security may exceed 15% at the annual weight adjustment and no issuer may exceed 24% at the quarterly one. The effect is visible above: the four giants are each 1.8 to 2.9 points lighter in QQQM than in SCHG. SCHG's index also caps weights, but its prospectus describes that capping as aligning weights with the diversification rules that apply to the fund, so the biggest growth companies keep more of their full market weight.
Past the top ten, QQQM is the narrower fund: with only about 100 names, its top 50 cover 88% of the money against SCHG's 86%. So the honest summary is that SCHG concentrates more at the very top and QQQM concentrates more overall. Neither is a diversified fund. Both are large-cap growth.
One rule changed in 2026. From 1 May 2026, Nasdaq added a "fast entry" rule: a large new listing that ranks within the index's top 40 by market value can be added after 15 trading days. On 2 Oct 2026 Invesco's holdings page listed Space Exploration Technologies at 2.82% of QQQM, a name that was not in the fund's May filing. Expect the Nasdaq-100 to pick up big IPOs faster than it used to.
Where the Money Sits
Both funds' semi-annual reports cover the period ended 28 February 2026 and both use the Global Industry Classification Standard, so this is a like-for-like sector table.
| Sector (GICS), 28 Feb 2026 | QQQM | SCHG |
|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 49.9% | 42.6% |
| Communication Services | 15.6% | 16.0% |
| Consumer Discretionary | 12.5% | 12.6% |
| Consumer Staples | 8.5% | 2.0% |
| Health Care | 5.2% | 9.3% |
| Industrials | 4.3% | 6.9% |
| Financials | in "other" below | 7.3% |
| All other sectors | 3.8% (each under 2%) | 3.2% |
Three differences matter. QQQM carries about seven points more technology. It holds four times as much in consumer staples: both funds own Costco, but only QQQM owns Walmart and PepsiCo, which the Dow Jones growth screen did not class as growth. And SCHG holds real weights in health care and financials, the two places QQQM is light by design.
What the Difference Has Been Worth
All rows below are average annual total returns at net asset value for the period ended 30 June 2026, the latest quarter both issuers had published when we checked.
| Annualized, to 30 Jun 2026 | 1 year | 3 years | 5 years | 10 years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QQQM | 34.17% | 26.66% | 16.52% | not yet (launched Oct 2020) |
| QQQ, same Nasdaq-100 index | 34.03% | 26.55% | 16.45% | 22.07% |
| SCHG | 16.40% | 22.33% | 13.69% | 18.66% |
| QQQM minus SCHG | +17.77 | +4.33 | +2.83 | +3.41 (using QQQ) |
| Nasdaq-100 Index | 34.38 | 26.83 | 16.68 | 22.33 |
| Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth TSM Index | 16.45 | 22.37 | 13.73 | 18.70 |
That one-year gap is not normal. We have not run a performance attribution, but the slice of QQQM that SCHG does not own is led by chipmakers such as Micron, Intel and Lam Research, and a seventeen-point gap in one year points to a narrow group of stocks rather than a lasting edge. Two months later, to 31 August 2026, the one-year gap was 9 points (QQQM 26.39%, SCHG 17.33%) and the three-year gap barely over one (24.59% against 23.45%). Treat the short windows as noise from one sector, not a property of either fund.
The longer record still favours the Nasdaq-100, by about three points a year. That is the reward from a decade in which large Nasdaq technology companies led the market. It is a backward-looking number and it carries the risk that came with it: the same concentration in one industry can cut the other way.
This is educational information, not personalized investment advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results, and all investing carries the risk of loss.
Which One Fits You
Choose SCHG if you want a growth fund to hold for decades at the lowest cost. At 0.04% it is one of the cheapest growth ETFs available, it covers growth companies on every exchange, and it owns health care and payment networks the Nasdaq-100 leaves out. Know that you are accepting more weight in the top few giants, about 60% in ten companies.
Choose QQQM if you specifically want the Nasdaq-100. You pay 0.11 points a year more for a semiconductor-heavy portfolio with lighter mega-cap weights and almost no financials. It is the right tool when the index itself is the point, for example to match a benchmark you track or to own the big Nasdaq IPOs as they enter.
In a Roth IRA, traditional IRA or HSA, taxes do not separate them, so the fee and your view on the sector mix decide. Switching between them inside those accounts costs nothing in tax.
In a taxable account, both funds' 30-day yields are under half a percent, so dividend tax is minor either way. If you already hold one at a gain, selling to buy the other realizes that gain for a 59%-overlapping portfolio. Point new money at the one you prefer instead.
Already own an S&P 500 or total-market fund? Adding either one stacks more weight on the same mega-caps. Run your own mix through the Portfolio Overlap Checker and compare with QQQM vs VOO first.
Do not hold both unless you have chosen the split on purpose. The combination is a large-cap growth fund with two expense ratios.
Comparing others? Vanguard's growth fund is covered in QQQM vs VUG and SCHG vs VUG; the older, pricier Nasdaq-100 wrapper is in SCHG vs QQQ.
Sources & Methodology
- Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II, Form 485BPOS filed 18 Dec 2025: QQQM's fee table, cost example, index rules and weight caps.
- Invesco supplement dated 30 Apr 2026: the Nasdaq-100 methodology changes effective 1 May 2026, including fast entry.
- Schwab Strategic Trust, Form 485BPOS filed 22 Dec 2025 and Schwab supplement dated 11 Jun 2026: SCHG's fee table, cost example and index description, and the current advisory fee schedule.
- Invesco, Form N-CSRS for the period ended 28 Feb 2026 and Schwab, Form N-CSRS for the period ended 28 Feb 2026: sector weights, top ten holdings, net assets and holdings counts.
- QQQM Form N-PORT, period ended 31 May 2026 and SCHG Form N-PORT, period ended 31 May 2026: the holdings behind the overlap and concentration tables.
- Invesco QQQM fund page, the Invesco QQQ fund page and the Schwab SCHG fund page: returns, live expense ratios, net assets, holdings counts and yields, read 4 Oct 2026.
How the overlap was computed. For each company held by both funds we took the smaller of its two weights and added them up, which is the standard overlap measure and the one the site's checker uses. Weights are each filing's own percent-of-net-assets field, with multiple share classes of one company combined. The top-ten figures in our tables use the same combined weights; the funds' own reports count Alphabet's two share classes separately, which is why their totals are lower.
What we could not verify. We did not open Nasdaq's or S&P Dow Jones Indices' own methodology documents; index rules are quoted from the funds' SEC prospectuses. QQQM's report does not break out a financials weight. QQQM has no ten-year record, so the ten-year comparison uses QQQ, which tracks the same index at a higher fee.
This article is for general education and is not investment, tax or legal advice. Fund data changes daily, index returns cannot be invested in directly, and past performance does not guarantee future results. All investing carries the risk of loss. Figures were checked against the sources above on 4 October 2026; confirm current figures with the issuer before acting.
FAQ: QQQM vs SCHG
Is QQQM or SCHG better?
For a low-cost growth holding, SCHG: it charges 0.04% against QQQM's 0.15% and covers growth stocks on every exchange. QQQM has the stronger record, 16.52% a year over five years to 30 June 2026 against 13.69%, because the Nasdaq-100's chipmakers and technology names led. Pick on cost and sector mix, not on the last twelve months.
How much do QQQM and SCHG overlap?
59.4% by weight, based on both funds' SEC holdings filings for 31 May 2026. They shared 46 companies, which made up 64.8% of QQQM and 71.8% of SCHG.
Should I own both QQQM and SCHG?
Usually not. They are built around the same mega-caps, so owning both adds weight to NVIDIA, Apple, Alphabet and Microsoft and gives you two fees. If you want a specific tilt toward the Nasdaq-100's chipmakers, choose the weights deliberately.
Which is more concentrated, QQQM or SCHG?
SCHG at the top: its ten largest companies were 60.1% of the fund against QQQM's 50.3% on 31 May 2026. The Nasdaq-100 caps its largest weights; SCHG's index caps only to meet fund diversification rules. QQQM holds fewer stocks overall, about 100 against about 190.
Why is QQQM more expensive than SCHG?
QQQM's prospectus fee is 0.15% and SCHG's is 0.04%. Invesco does not break the fee into components, so we cannot say how much is index licensing. QQQM is still cheaper than QQQ, which charges 0.18% for the same index.
Does SCHG hold financial stocks?
Yes. Financials were 7.3% of SCHG's investments on 28 February 2026, including Visa and Mastercard. The Nasdaq-100 excludes companies its index provider classes as financials, so QQQM holds very little that GICS calls financial: PayPal, at 0.18% of the fund on 31 May 2026, was one.
Which is better for a Roth IRA?
Taxes do not separate them inside a Roth, so the deciding factors are the fee and which portfolio you want. SCHG is cheaper; QQQM is the pure Nasdaq-100. You can switch inside the account without a tax bill.
Cite This Page
Journalists, educators and bloggers are welcome to cite this comparison. Please link back so readers can reach the underlying filings.
"QQQM vs SCHG: 59% the Same, and SCHG Is the More Top-Heavy One." Wealthy Pot, 2026. https://wealthypot.com/qqqm-vs-schg/
Related comparisons: SCHG vs QQQ · QQQ vs QQQM · QQQM vs VUG · SCHG vs VUG · QQQM vs VOO · All ETF comparisons
