LSAF vs QQQ
LSAF vs QQQ
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. LSAF delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 103 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | LSAF | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $123M | $455.8B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.60% | 0.41% | |
| Holdings | 102 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +21.67% | +16.83% | |
| 1Y Return | +31.80% | +26.58% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.50% | +24.70% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.31% | +14.88% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.3% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -41.7% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | LeaderShares | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 1, 2018 | Mar 10, 1999 |
LSAF vs QQQ Performance
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) is a ETF from LeaderShares and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year LSAF returned +31.80% while QQQ returned +26.58%. Year to date, LSAF is up 21.67% versus a gain of 16.83% for QQQ.
Over three years, LSAF compounded at +19.50% per year against +24.70% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +11.31% and +14.88% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.06% annualized vs +11.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 19.3% for LSAF. 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 -41.7% for LSAF and -83.0% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.72. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LSAF charges 0.75% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $18 annually, a gap of $57 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LSAF currently yields 0.60% against 0.41% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
LSAF and QQQ share 4 holdings out of 199 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.8% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in LSAF | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| WDC | 1.74% | 0.85% | 0.89% |
| PLTR | 0.88% | 1.32% | 0.44% |
| BKNG | 0.88% | 0.60% | 0.28% |
| MAR | Pro | Pro | Pro |
See all 4 holdings LSAF shares with QQQ Exact weights in each fund and the difference, for every overlapping position. Get FundXLS Pro: $29/moFirst 500 subscribers, then $49/mo. Cancel anytime. | |||
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, LSAF or QQQ?
LSAF has an expense ratio of 0.75% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $57 per year of difference.
Which performed better, LSAF or QQQ?
Over the past year LSAF returned +31.80% vs +26.58% for QQQ, so LSAF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), LSAF annualized +11.35% vs +13.06% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, LSAF or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 19.3% for LSAF. Worst drawdown: LSAF -41.7% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both LSAF and QQQ?
LSAF and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.72, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between LSAF and QQQ?
LSAF and QQQ share 4 common holdings with a 2.8% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 199 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, LSAF or QQQ?
LSAF yields 0.60% while QQQ yields 0.41%, so LSAF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.