INTW vs QQQ

INTW vs QQQ

Which is better, INTW or QQQ?

Leverage Strategy against Large Cap Growth.

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. INTW led over 1Y and the full window.

Lower Fees: QQQHigher Returns: INTW

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

MetricINTWQQQ
Expense Ratio1.50%0.18%Best
AUM$399M$506.1B
Dividend Yield0.00%0.42%
Holdings4321
YTD Return+236.48%Best+19.30%
1Y Return+279.10%Best+22.47%
3Y Return (annualized)-+26.18%
5Y Return (annualized)-+15.42%
Volatility (annualized)271.4%19.9%Best
Max Drawdown-69.2%-22.8%Best
$10,000 over 1.7 years$59,559Best$13,810
Fund FamilyGraniteSharesInvesco (US)
CategoryAlternativeEquity
StyleLeverage StrategyLarge Cap Growth
InceptionFeb 13, 2025Mar 10, 1999

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 13, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.7 years).

INTW 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

INTW vs QQQ Performance

GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) is an ETF from GraniteShares and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year INTW returned +279.10% while QQQ returned +22.47%. Year to date, INTW is up 236.48% versus a gain of 19.30% for QQQ.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

INTW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 271.4% compared with 19.9% for QQQ. 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 -69.2% for INTW and -22.8% 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 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.

Fees and Cost Over Time

INTW charges 1.50% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $150 vs $18 annually, a gap of $132 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, INTW currently yields 0.00% against 0.42% for QQQ.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of INTW and QQQ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

INTWQQQ

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, INTW or QQQ?

INTW has an expense ratio of 1.50% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $132 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, INTW or QQQ?

Over the past year INTW returned +279.10% vs +22.47% for QQQ, so INTW leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), INTW annualized +185.66% vs +20.91% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, INTW or QQQ?

INTW has been the more volatile fund at 271.4% annualized versus 19.9% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: INTW -69.2% vs QQQ -22.8%.

Should I hold both INTW and QQQ?

INTW and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which pays a higher dividend, INTW or QQQ?

INTW yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is QQQ better than INTW?

QQQ has a lower expense ratio. INTW led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.