CDL vs QQQ
VictoryShares US Large Cap High Div Volatility Wtd ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, CDL or QQQ?
Large Cap Value against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. CDL is less concentrated, with 15.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.7%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CDL | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $387M | $506.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 3.27% | 0.42% |
| Holdings | 102 | 321 |
| YTD Return | +13.74% | +19.30%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.99% | +22.47%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.32% | +26.18%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.35% | +15.42%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.0%Best | 18.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -41.4% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,635 | $20,484Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 15.4%Best | 46.7% |
| Fund Family | Victory Capital Management Inc. | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 7, 2015 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 8, 2015 to Oct 14, 2026 (11.3 years).
CDL vs QQQ growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 11.3 years both funds cover.
CDL vs QQQ Performance
VictoryShares US Large Cap High Div Volatility Wtd ETF (CDL) is an ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc. and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year CDL returned +14.99% while QQQ returned +22.47%. Year to date, CDL is up 13.74% versus a gain of 19.30% for QQQ.
Over three years, CDL compounded at +16.32% per year against +26.18% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +9.35% and +15.42% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +19.00% annualized vs +9.12%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.9% compared with 15.0% for CDL. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -41.4% for CDL and -35.1% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.55. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CDL charges 0.35% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $18 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CDL currently yields 3.27% against 0.42% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
10.3% of CDL's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 2.8% of QQQ's money is in holdings CDL also owns.
CDL and QQQ share little of their money.
10 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in CDL and 101 in QQQ, against full books of 102 and 321.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 83 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for CDL (93.5% of the fund), and 88 for CDL that do not appear in QQQ (87.9%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in CDL | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| PEPPepsico Inc. | 1.17% | 0.72% | 0.45% |
| AEPAmerican Electric Power Co. Inc. | 1.43% | 0.27% | 1.16% |
| XELXcel Energy Inc Common Stock Usd 2.5 | 1.35% | 0.18% | 1.17% |
| EXCExelon Corp | 1.29% | 0.17% | 1.12% |
| MDLZMondelez International Inc. Class A | 1.07% | 0.31% | 0.76% |
| HONHoneywell International Inc | 0.98% | 0.28% | 0.70% |
| KDPKeurig Dr Pepper Inc. | 1.01% | 0.17% | 0.84% |
| CMCSAComcast Corp. Class A(cmcsa) | 0.68% | 0.32% | 0.36% |
| PAYXPaychex, Inc. | 0.72% | 0.15% | 0.57% |
| MCHPMicrochip Technology Inc. | 0.60% | 0.18% | 0.42% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CDL and QQQ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CDL or QQQ?
CDL has an expense ratio of 0.35% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CDL or QQQ?
Over the past year CDL returned +14.99% vs +22.47% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), CDL annualized +9.12% vs +19.00% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CDL or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 18.9% annualized versus 15.0% for CDL. Worst drawdown: CDL -41.4% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both CDL and QQQ?
CDL and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.55, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CDL and QQQ?
10.3% of CDL's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 2.8% of QQQ's is in holdings CDL also owns. They hold 10 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in CDL and 101 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, CDL or QQQ?
CDL yields 3.27% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so CDL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than CDL?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. CDL is less concentrated, with 15.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.