CSM vs QQQ
ProShares Large Cap Core Plus vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, CSM or QQQ?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. CSM is less concentrated, with 30.0% 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 | CSM | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.45% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $523M | $506.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.05% | 0.42% |
| Holdings | 308 | 321 |
| YTD Return | +9.19% | +19.30%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.52% | +22.47%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.54% | +26.18%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.10% | +15.42%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9%Best | 17.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -36.1% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,702 | $20,484Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 30.0%Best | 46.7% |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 13, 2009 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 14, 2009 to Oct 14, 2026 (17.3 years).
CSM 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 17.3 years both funds cover.
CSM vs QQQ Performance
ProShares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM) is an ETF from ProShares and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year CSM returned +14.52% while QQQ returned +22.47%. Year to date, CSM is up 9.19% versus a gain of 19.30% for QQQ.
Over three years, CSM compounded at +21.54% per year against +26.18% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +12.10% and +15.42% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +19.33% annualized vs +14.64%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.5% compared with 14.9% for CSM. 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 -36.1% for CSM 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 0.88. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CSM charges 0.45% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $45 vs $18 annually, a gap of $27 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CSM currently yields 1.05% against 0.42% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
36.5% of CSM's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 78.4% of QQQ's money is in holdings CSM also owns.
Most of QQQ is already inside CSM. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
54 positions in common, counted across the 301 positions we hold weights for in CSM and 101 in QQQ, against full books of 308 and 321.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 38 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for CSM (17.8% of the fund), and 238 for CSM that do not appear in QQQ (57.0%).
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 CSM | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 5.76% | 8.33% | 2.57% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.93% | 7.35% | 2.42% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 3.81% | 5.76% | 1.95% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.72% | 4.07% | 1.35% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.60% | 5.02% | 3.42% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc. | 0.98% | 4.17% | 3.19% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc-cl A | 1.87% | 3.05% | 1.18% |
| METAMeta Platform Inc | 1.37% | 3.26% | 1.89% |
| GOOGAlphabet, Inc.- Cl C | 1.43% | 2.85% | 1.42% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.70% | 2.53% | 0.83% |
78.4% of QQQ is already inside CSM.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CSM or QQQ?
CSM has an expense ratio of 0.45% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $27 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CSM or QQQ?
Over the past year CSM returned +14.52% vs +22.47% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), CSM annualized +14.64% vs +19.33% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CSM or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.5% annualized versus 14.9% for CSM. Worst drawdown: CSM -36.1% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both CSM and QQQ?
CSM and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.88, 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 CSM and QQQ?
78.4% of QQQ's money is in holdings CSM also owns. 78.4% of QQQ's is in holdings CSM also owns. They hold 54 positions in common, counted across the 301 positions we hold weights for in CSM and 101 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, CSM or QQQ?
CSM yields 1.05% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so CSM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than CSM?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. CSM is less concentrated, with 30.0% 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.