$10,000 in QQQ a decade ago turned into $59,128. The same $10,000 in VGT? $76,417.
That’s a $17,289 gap — and it came from two funds that share four of their top five holdings.
Both are branded as tech ETFs. Both hold Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, and Broadcom at the top. But the QQQ vs VGT debate isn’t about tech stocks — it’s about what counts as “tech” in the first place.
The index rules that define each fund create two completely different portfolios. The 10-year returns reflect that split — and the data should make you pause.
$10,000 Growth Comparison: QQQ vs VGT (2016–2025)
VGT didn’t just edge out QQQ over the last decade. It pulled ahead by more than $17,000 on a $10,000 investment — a gap that widened every single year from 2021 onward.
| Period | QQQ | VGT | VTI (Benchmark) | Gap (VGT − QQQ) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5-Year (2021–2025) | $20,175 | $22,045 | $18,485 | +$1,870 |
| 10-Year (2016–2025) | $59,128 | $76,417 | $37,899 | +$17,289 |
| CAGR | 19.45% | 22.55% | 14.25% | +3.10% |
Source: Yahoo Finance annual total returns (dividends reinvested). VTI included as broad market benchmark.
$10,000 → 10 Years Later
Gap: $17,289 · VGT delivered 29% more than QQQ on the same $10K
Both funds crushed the total U.S. stock market. VTI’s $37,899 looks modest next to QQQ’s $59,128 — and small next to VGT’s $76,417. But the QQQ vs VGT gap came from a specific structural reason. Not better stock picking. Not lower fees. A classification system.
Risk Profile: The Price VGT Pays for That $17K
VGT won 8 out of 10 years against QQQ. That sounds like a clear win — until you look at what the QQQ vs VGT risk numbers actually say.
| Metric | QQQ | VGT | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Top 3 Holdings Weight | 25.5% | 45.4% | VGT is 1.8× more concentrated |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.20 | 1.33 | VGT swings harder in both directions |
| Volatility (Recent) | 4.9% | 7.3% | VGT ~50% more volatile |
| Max Drawdown (Since Inception) | -82.97%* | -54.63% | *QQQ includes dot-com crash (2000) |
| Worst Calendar Year (10Y) | -32.58% | -29.70% | QQQ dropped harder in 2022 |
| Sharpe Ratio (1Y) | 0.60 | 0.56 | Similar risk-adjusted returns |
| Correlation (QQQ ↔ VGT) | 0.95 | Holding both adds near-zero diversification | |
Sources: PortfoliosLab (Sharpe, volatility, correlation), Yahoo Finance (beta), StockAnalysis (holdings weight). As of Feb 2026.
Nearly half of VGT rides on three stocks — Nvidia (18.2%), Apple (14.3%), and Microsoft (12.9%). In QQQ, those same three companies take up 25.5%. That 20-point concentration difference is the entire story of QQQ vs VGT’s risk profile.
Top 3 Holdings Weight: Same Stocks, Different Bets
Same three companies. 20-point concentration gap.
When those three names surge — like Nvidia’s 987% run from 2023 to 2025 — VGT looks like a genius allocation. When they stumble, VGT falls faster and harder. That’s not a design flaw. It’s the architecture of a single-sector fund.
Year-by-Year Total Returns: QQQ vs VGT (2016–2025)
The annual scoreboard tells a story QQQ holders probably haven’t seen: VGT won eight out of ten years.
| Year | QQQ | VGT | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | +7.10% | +13.77% | +12.83% | VGT |
| 2017 | +32.66% | +37.07% | +21.21% | VGT |
| 2018 | -0.12% | +2.45% | -5.21% | VGT |
| 2019 | +38.96% | +48.61% | +30.67% | VGT |
| 2020 | +48.62% | +46.00% | +21.03% | QQQ |
| 2021 | +27.42% | +30.45% | +25.67% | VGT |
| 2022 | -32.58% | -29.70% | -19.51% | VGT |
| 2023 | +54.85% | +52.65% | +26.05% | QQQ |
| 2024 | +25.58% | +29.31% | +23.81% | VGT |
| 2025 | +20.77% | +21.78% | +17.10% | VGT |
Source: Yahoo Finance annual total returns (dividends reinvested).
Annual Return Gap: VGT minus QQQ
← QQQ won · center line · VGT won →
QQQ’s two wins — 2020 and 2023 — came when non-tech names inside the Nasdaq-100 surged alongside tech. Amazon jumped 76% in 2020. Meta doubled in 2023. VGT doesn’t hold either of those stocks.
VGT’s biggest single-year advantage was 2019: +48.61% vs +38.96%. That 9.65-point gap alone accounts for a meaningful chunk of the decade-long difference. Semiconductor stocks — which carry heavier weight in VGT — drove that year.
Holdings: The Classification Gap That Explains Everything
This is where QQQ vs VGT stops being a performance debate and starts being a classification debate.
QQQ tracks the Nasdaq-100 — the 100 largest non-financial companies listed on the Nasdaq exchange. It doesn’t filter by sector. If a company is big and trades on Nasdaq, it’s in.
VGT tracks the MSCI US IMI Information Technology 25/50 Index — a pure sector fund. Only companies classified as “information technology” under the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) qualify.
The problem: GICS doesn’t classify some of the world’s biggest tech-driven companies as “information technology.”
| Company | QQQ Weight | GICS Sector |
|---|---|---|
| Amazon | 5.20% | Consumer Discretionary |
| Alphabet (GOOGL + GOOG) | 7.56% | Communication Services |
| Tesla | 3.42% | Consumer Discretionary |
| Meta | 2.91% | Communication Services |
| Netflix | 2.28% | Communication Services |
| Costco | 2.11% | Consumer Staples |
| T-Mobile | 1.21% | Communication Services |
| PepsiCo | 1.05% | Consumer Staples |
| Total Missing from VGT | ~25.7% | — |
Roughly a quarter of QQQ consists of companies that VGT structurally cannot own. Amazon runs one of the world’s largest cloud computing platforms. Alphabet builds AI infrastructure. Meta operates the largest social network. Most investors would call them tech companies. GICS disagrees.
VGT compensates by going deeper into pure IT — semiconductors, enterprise software, IT services. Where QQQ spreads 9.16% across Nvidia, VGT concentrates 18.19% in the same stock. You lose Amazon and Alphabet, but you double down on chipmakers and software firms.
Top 10 Holdings Side by Side
| # | QQQ | Weight | VGT | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nvidia | 9.16% | Nvidia | 18.19% |
| 2 | Apple | 8.86% | Apple | 14.29% |
| 3 | Microsoft | 7.46% | Microsoft | 12.93% |
| 4 | Broadcom | 6.22% | Broadcom | 4.48% |
| 5 | Amazon | 5.20% | Palantir | 2.09% |
| 6 | Alphabet (GOOGL) | 3.90% | Oracle | 2.05% |
| 7 | Alphabet (GOOG) | 3.66% | AMD | 1.97% |
| 8 | Tesla | 3.42% | Cisco | 1.38% |
| 9 | Meta | 2.91% | IBM | 1.36% |
| 10 | Netflix | 2.28% | Micron | 1.21% |
| Top 10 Total | 53.07% | 59.95% | ||
Italic names = held in QQQ but excluded from VGT due to GICS classification. Source: StockAnalysis.com, as of Feb 2026.
Six of QQQ’s top 10 — Amazon, Alphabet, Tesla, Meta, Netflix — don’t appear in VGT at all. VGT replaces them with deeper IT-sector holdings: Oracle, IBM, Cisco, AMD. More tech, but a narrower slice of it.
Dividend Yield and Cost Comparison
Neither fund exists for income. But the QQQ vs VGT cost difference is worth a look.
| Metric | QQQ | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18% | 0.09% |
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.46% | 0.41% |
| Distribution Frequency | Quarterly | Quarterly |
| 20-Year Fee Drag ($500/mo, 10% return) | $353,676 | $357,806 |
| Fee Difference (20Y) | ~$4,100 advantage to VGT | |
QQQ’s expense ratio dropped from 0.20% to 0.18% in December 2025, when Invesco converted it from a unit investment trust to an open-ended ETF. That’s a step in the right direction — but VGT‘s 0.09% is exactly half.
Over 20 years with $500 monthly contributions, the 0.09% QQQ vs VGT expense gap compounds to roughly $4,100. Not a life-changing number on its own — but not nothing either, especially combined with VGT’s historically higher returns.
For investors specifically concerned about QQQ’s fee, QQQM offers the same Nasdaq-100 exposure at 0.15% — splitting the cost difference without changing the portfolio.
QQQ vs VGT: Which Tech ETF Fits Your Portfolio?
- You want maximum IT-sector concentration
- You’re comfortable with 45% in three stocks
- Lower fees matter (0.09% vs 0.18%)
- You believe semiconductors will continue leading
- You want Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Tesla
- You prefer multi-sector exposure (36% non-tech)
- Lower volatility matters (beta 1.20 vs 1.33)
- You want a cushion if the IT sector stumbles
VGT’s 10-year data is hard to argue with — $76,417 vs $59,128. But a significant portion of that outperformance traces back to Nvidia’s weight in the fund. If you’re making a 10+ year bet and believe semiconductor dominance continues, VGT’s concentration works in your favor.
If you’d rather have exposure to the broader definition of “tech” — cloud, social, e-commerce, autonomous vehicles — QQQ covers territory VGT structurally cannot enter. That’s the core QQQ vs VGT distinction.
Past returns aren’t a guarantee that VGT will continue leading. But 8-out-of-10 years is a pattern — not a fluke. The QQQ vs VGT decision comes down to which version of “tech” you actually want to own.
QQQ vs VGT: Fund Overview at a Glance
| Spec | QQQ | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| Full Name | Invesco QQQ Trust | Vanguard Information Technology ETF |
| Index | Nasdaq-100 | MSCI US IMI/IT 25/50 |
| Issuer | Invesco | Vanguard |
| Inception | March 1999 | January 2004 |
| Expense Ratio | 0.18% | 0.09% |
| AUM | ~$412B | ~$130B |
| Holdings | ~104 | ~325 |
| Dividend Yield | 0.46% | 0.41% |
| P/E Ratio | 32.09 | 42.40 |
| Sector Focus | ~64% Tech, ~36% Other | 100% Information Technology |
Sources: Invesco, Vanguard, StockAnalysis.com, Yahoo Finance. AUM and holdings as of Feb 2026.
QQQ vs VGT: Frequently Asked Questions
Is VGT better than QQQ for long-term investing?
Over the past 10 years, VGT has delivered higher total returns than QQQ — $76,417 vs $59,128 on a $10,000 investment. However, VGT achieves those returns with significantly higher concentration risk (45% in three stocks vs QQQ’s 25%). Past performance doesn’t guarantee future results, and which fund is more suitable depends on an individual investor’s risk tolerance and sector outlook.
Why doesn’t VGT hold Amazon, Google, or Meta?
VGT tracks the MSCI US IMI Information Technology 25/50 Index, which only includes companies classified as “Information Technology” under the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS). Amazon is classified as Consumer Discretionary, while Alphabet and Meta fall under Communication Services. These classifications determine what VGT can and cannot hold — regardless of whether the market considers these companies “tech.”
Should I hold both QQQ and VGT?
With a 0.95 correlation, holding both QQQ and VGT provides almost no diversification benefit. The two funds share their top four holdings (Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom). Investors seeking diversification alongside a tech tilt would typically pair one of these with a broad market fund like VTI or VOO.
Is QQQ now cheaper after the 2025 fee cut?
QQQ’s expense ratio dropped from 0.20% to 0.18% in December 2025 when Invesco converted it from a unit investment trust to an open-ended ETF. It’s exactly double VGT’s 0.09%. Investors focused solely on Nasdaq-100 exposure at lower cost can also consider QQQM at 0.15%.
Why is VGT more volatile than QQQ despite holding more stocks?
VGT holds roughly 325 stocks compared to QQQ’s 104 — but its top three positions account for 45.4% of the fund. That extreme concentration at the top, combined with 100% allocation to a single sector, creates higher price swings than QQQ’s more spread-out, multi-sector approach. More holdings doesn’t always mean more diversification.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Always do your own research or consult a licensed financial advisor before making investment decisions.