PlainIndex

ETF comparison

IJS vs QQQ

US Small Cap vs US Large Cap Growth.

iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Value ETF · Invesco QQQ Trust

Holdings overlap

0.0 %

0 positions appear in both funds. Buying equal dollars of IJS and QQQ would leave roughly 0.0% of each dollar exposed to the same underlying securities.

IJS only 0.0% Shared 0.0% QQQ only 0.0%
In IJS only
0 positions
Shared
0 positions
In QQQ only
0 positions

Holdings data for IJS covers 0.0% of fund weight. The remainder lacks matchable identifiers in the N-PORT filing.

Holdings data for QQQ covers 0.0% of fund weight. The remainder lacks matchable identifiers in the N-PORT filing.

Side by side

IJS

iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Value ETF

iShares · US Small Cap

87 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.18%
Net assets
$7.91B
TTM yield
1.31%
Top-10 conc.
—
QQQ

Invesco QQQ Trust

Invesco · US Large Cap Growth

89 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.18%
Net assets
$440.26B
TTM yield
0.42%
Top-10 conc.
—

Sub-score comparison

82
Cost
82
86
Tax efficiency
89
96
Liquidity
100
N/A
Concentration
N/A
—
Tracking quality
—
IJS sub-score QQQ

Tracking-quality sub-score is not yet computed for any fund — see methodology for which inputs are live.

Cost difference

Expense ratios are effectively identical (0.18% vs 0.18%).

Fee figure is the annual expense charged on $100,000. It compounds over time — we publish a fuller cost-projection calculator on the methodology page.

Top shared holdings

0 shared in total

No shared holdings between these funds.

Only in IJS

0 total

Every IJS position is also held by QQQ.

Only in QQQ

0 total

Every QQQ position is also held by IJS.

Holdings overlap is the sum of min(weight_a, weight_b) over positions matched on ISIN (CUSIP fallback). Methodology: see /methodology/.

Comparing two funds doesn't endorse swapping one for the other. Tax-lot history, account type, and personal goals matter — PlainIndex publishes data and methodology, not investment advice.