OGIG vs QQQX
ALPS O'Shares Global Internet Giants ETF vs Nuveen NASDAQ 100 Dynamic Overwrite Fund
Which is better, OGIG or QQQX?
Each has led over a different period.
OGIG has a lower expense ratio. OGIG led over the full window, QQQX over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y. OGIG is less concentrated, with 45.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 55.2%.
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 | OGIG | QQQX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.48%Best | 0.92% |
| AUM | $106M | $1.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.08% | 8.33% |
| Holdings | 55 | 286 |
| YTD Return | -2.92% | +15.65%Best |
| 1Y Return | -10.78% | +22.71%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.94% | +20.79%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -2.00% | +9.63%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 25.6% | 20.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -66.0% | -43.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $9,039 | $15,836Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 45.0%Best | 55.2% |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Nuveen |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 5, 2018 | Jan 30, 2007 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 5, 2018 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.4 years).
OGIG vs QQQX 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 8.4 years both funds cover.
OGIG vs QQQX Performance
ALPS O'Shares Global Internet Giants ETF (OGIG) is an ETF from ALPS Advisors and Nuveen NASDAQ 100 Dynamic Overwrite Fund (QQQX) is an ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year OGIG returned -10.78% while QQQX returned +22.71%. Year to date, OGIG is down 2.92% versus a gain of 15.65% for QQQX.
Over three years, OGIG compounded at +16.94% per year against +20.79% for QQQX; over five years the annualized figures are -2.00% and +9.63% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, OGIG has the edge at +8.63% annualized vs +6.74%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
OGIG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 25.6% compared with 20.6% for QQQX. 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 -66.0% for OGIG and -43.4% for QQQX. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.71. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
OGIG charges 0.48% per year while QQQX charges 0.92%. On a $10,000 position that is $48 vs $92 annually, a gap of $44 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, OGIG currently yields 0.08% against 8.33% for QQQX.
Holdings Overlap
39.7% of OGIG's money is in holdings QQQX also owns. 23.9% of QQQX's money is in holdings OGIG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 245 days apart, OGIG as of Oct 2, 2026 and QQQX as of Jan 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
16 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in OGIG and 261 in QQQX, against full books of 55 and 286.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 217 positions for QQQX that do not appear in our book for OGIG (70.5% of the fund), and 25 for OGIG that do not appear in QQQX (46.6%).
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 OGIG | Weight in QQQX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.05% | 7.86% | 1.81% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 5.75% | 5.03% | 0.72% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 6.50% | 3.71% | 2.79% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 5.05% | 1.90% | 3.15% |
| ORCLOracle Corp - Common | 4.03% | 0.44% | 3.59% |
| BKNGBooking Holdings, Inc. | 0.74% | 2.03% | 1.29% |
| MELIMercadolibre Inc | 1.98% | 0.68% | 1.30% |
| NOWServicenow, Inc. | 1.80% | 0.27% | 1.53% |
| ADBEAdobe Systems | 0.89% | 0.94% | 0.05% |
| UUnity Software Inc. | 1.39% | 0.03% | 1.36% |
39.7% of OGIG is already inside QQQX.
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, OGIG or QQQX?
OGIG has an expense ratio of 0.48% while QQQX charges 0.92%. OGIG is the cheaper option, by $44 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, OGIG or QQQX?
Over the past year OGIG returned -10.78% vs +22.71% for QQQX, so QQQX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), OGIG annualized +8.63% vs +6.74% for QQQX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, OGIG or QQQX?
OGIG has been the more volatile fund at 25.6% annualized versus 20.6% for QQQX. Worst drawdown: OGIG -66.0% vs QQQX -43.4%.
Should I hold both OGIG and QQQX?
OGIG and QQQX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.71, 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 OGIG and QQQX?
39.7% of OGIG's money is in holdings QQQX also owns. 23.9% of QQQX's is in holdings OGIG also owns. They hold 16 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in OGIG and 261 in QQQX.
Which pays a higher dividend, OGIG or QQQX?
OGIG yields 0.08% while QQQX yields 8.33%, so QQQX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQX better than OGIG?
OGIG has a lower expense ratio. OGIG led over the full window, QQQX over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y. OGIG is less concentrated, with 45.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 55.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.