ETF Comparison

QQQM vs SCHG: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Data updated July 4, 2026

Invesco

ETFs255

Total AUM$971B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

Invesco is a major player in the ETF space known for offering a broad, diversified lineup of 71 funds spanning multiple investment themes and strategies. Their portfolio spans income-focused funds, factor-based equity strategies, commodity exposure, digital assets, ESG investing, and the popular Invesco QQQ family tracking the Nasdaq-100, serving both income-seeking and growth-oriented investors. The issuer is particularly recognized for specialized offerings like BulletShares (laddered bond funds), sector rotation strategies, and thematic investing options, making it a comprehensive choice for investors seeking varied exposures beyond traditional index funds.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on QQQM.

See all Invesco ETFs

Schwab

ETFs34

Total AUM$574B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

Schwab is known for offering low-cost, broad-based ETFs that serve both core portfolio holdings and specialized investment strategies. Their 33-fund lineup spans multiple asset classes including bonds, equities, international markets, digital assets, and factor-based strategies, with a notable emphasis on dividend-focused funds like SCHD alongside core index options. The issuer emphasizes accessibility for individual investors through competitive expense ratios and a diverse range of fund families designed to support various investment objectives.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on SCHG.

See all Schwab ETFs

Side-by-side snapshot

	QQQM	SCHG
Full name	Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Issuer	Invesco	Schwab
Last Close	$293.42 as of July 4, 2026	$34.12 as of July 4, 2026
Distribution yield	0.48%	0.40%
Distribution Safety Score	96	100
Expense ratio	0.15%	0.04%
AUM	$96.8B	$58.4B
Distribution frequency	Quarterly	Quarterly
Underlying index	NASDAQ-100 Index	Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index
Objective	Track the NASDAQ-100 Index with a lower expense ratio alternative to QQQ.	Capital Appreciation
Asset class	Equity	Equity
Inception date	10/13/2020	12/11/2009
Beta	1.18	1.19
Last dividend	$0.3520	$0.0340
Ex-dividend date	06/22/2026	06/24/2026

Income calculator

See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — no signup required.

Build a sample portfolio Forecast income

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.

Total returns

QQQM has outpaced SCHG over the trailing twelve months, posting a 30.85% total return against 18.35%. The lead holds up over 5 years too: QQQM has compounded at 15.72% a year, against 13.75% for SCHG. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Symbol	YTD	1Y	3Y	5Y	Since Oct 2020	Volatility	Sharpe	Sortino	Max drawdown
QQQM	16.39%	30.85%	25.16%	15.72%	17.46%	20.0%	0.90	1.29	-22.7%
SCHG	5.11%	18.35%	22.62%	13.75%	15.63%	19.4%	0.82	1.17	-23.4%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date, split-adjusted, as of July 2, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; longer windows are annualized. “Since Oct 2020” measures every fund from October 13, 2020 — the youngest fund's first trading day — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.

Quick verdict

QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both quarterly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

QQQM offers the higher yield at 0.48% vs 0.40% for SCHG. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

SCHG is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.04% compared to 0.15%.

They track different benchmarks: QQQM is linked to NASDAQ-100 Index while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index, which means their performance drivers differ.

QQQM is the larger fund by assets ($96.8B), which generally means tighter spreads and better liquidity.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, QQQM would generate roughly $4.00/month, while SCHG would produce $3.33/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay quarterly distributions.

QQQM yield0.48%

SCHG yield0.40%

Monthly diff on $10K$0.67

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, QQQM would cost approximately $150 in fees vs $40 for SCHG (simplified, not compounded). The $110.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

QQQM ER0.15%

SCHG ER0.04%

Strategy & risk

QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index with a growth approach, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index with a capital appreciation approach. Beta is 1.18 for QQQM and 1.19 for SCHG, indicating QQQM is less volatile relative to the market.

QQQM beta1.18

SCHG beta1.19

Fund details

QQQM is managed by Invesco (launched 10/13/2020) with $96.8B in assets. SCHG is managed by Schwab (launched 12/11/2009) with $58.4B in assets.

QQQM AUM$96.8B

SCHG AUM$58.4B

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is QQQM or SCHG better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. QQQM currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.

What is the difference between QQQM and SCHG?

QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) tracks NASDAQ-100 Index with a growth approach, while SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index with a capital appreciation approach. They are issued by Invesco and Schwab respectively.

Can I hold both QQQM and SCHG?

Yes. Many income investors hold both to diversify across different strategies and underlying indexes. This can reduce concentration risk while maintaining a strong income stream.

Which has lower fees, QQQM or SCHG?

QQQM has an expense ratio of 0.15% while SCHG charges 0.04%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in QQQM vs SCHG generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in QQQM would generate roughly $4.00 per month ($48.00 annually). The same in SCHG would produce about $3.33 per month ($40.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, QQQM or SCHG?

More comparisons to explore

People also compare QQQM with

People also compare SCHG with

Popular comparisons

QQQM vs SCHG — at a glance

Generated June 2026 from current fund data.

Overview

QQQM and SCHG are both broad large-cap growth ETFs that track U.S. equity indexes, but they differ in their underlying holdings and fee structure. QQQM follows the NASDAQ-100, which is heavily concentrated in technology and includes 100 large-cap stocks; SCHG tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Index, a more diversified basket of roughly 320 growth-oriented stocks across multiple sectors. The key trade-off is concentration versus breadth, paired with a meaningful difference in cost.

How they differ

QQQM's biggest distinction is its narrow mandate: the NASDAQ-100 leans heavily toward technology, consumer discretionary, and communication services, giving it a sector tilt that SCHG doesn't share. SCHG spreads its large-cap growth exposure across the broader market and includes more exposure to healthcare, financials, and industrials.

On fees, SCHG holds a clear advantage at a 0.04% expense ratio versus QQQM's 0.15%—a 0.11 percentage point gap that compounds over time. QQQM has grown to $96.8B in AUM since its 2020 inception, while SCHG has accumulated $58.4B since 2009, suggesting QQQM has attracted faster flows despite its higher cost. Both distribute quarterly and carry nearly identical betas of 1.18–1.19, indicating similar sensitivity to broad market swings.

Who each is best for

QQQM: Fits investors comfortable with heavy technology exposure who want pure NASDAQ-100 beta at a lower cost than the flagship QQQ fund and value simplicity in tracking a well-known index.

SCHG: Designed for growth-focused investors who prefer a diversified sector mix and minimal drag from fees, particularly those who want large-cap growth without overweighting technology or any single industry.

Key risks to know

NASDAQ concentration risk. QQQM's 100-stock universe means a sharp decline in mega-cap tech names—which dominate the index—can drive outsized losses. SCHG's broader 320-stock universe distributes this risk more evenly.

Sector tilt disparity. QQQM's tech-heavy weighting means it will likely outpace SCHG in tech bull markets but underperform significantly during tech downturns. SCHG's diversification provides steadier but potentially lower returns when growth is driven by a few dominant names.

Fee drag over decades. The 0.11 percentage point expense ratio difference between them may seem small, but over 20 years it compounds to meaningful underperformance for QQQM, all else equal—roughly 2.2 percentage points of cumulative drag.

Beta similarity masks holdings divergence. Despite nearly identical betas, the two funds' daily price movements can diverge sharply depending on which sectors lead. This means using both together for diversification is less effective than the similar beta suggests.

Bottom line

If you're seeking pure NASDAQ-100 exposure and accept the concentration in tech, QQQM delivers that at reasonable cost; if you want broad large-cap growth with minimal fees and sector diversification, SCHG's lower expense ratio and wider holding base stand out. Neither is inherently "better"—the choice hinges on whether you believe concentrated growth exposure justifies higher fees than a diversified alternative. Past performance does not predict future results.

AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.