What does the term 'expense ratio' mean for these two funds?

An expense ratio represents the annual cost of operating an ETF, expressed as a percentage of assets. It covers management fees and other expenses. SCHG has an expense ratio of 0.04%, while QQQM's is 0.15%. A lower ratio means fewer fees are deducted from the fund's value. Over many years, these small differences in annual fees accumulate, impacting the net return the investor keeps. This is a key efficiency metric for long-term growth ETFs.

How does the inception date affect our understanding of these funds?

SCHG was launched in December 2009, providing a longer track record for evaluating its performance through various economic cycles. QQQM was established later, in October 2020. While both funds now track similar market segments, the longer history of SCHG offers a different dataset for historical analysis. Investors can refer to the earlier period to see how the fund managed during different market conditions, though this does not predict future returns.

Why is net assets important when comparing these two ETFs?

Net assets reflect the fund's size and total value. Larger funds often provide greater liquidity, making it easier to buy and sell shares without significantly affecting the price. QQQM has net assets of $105.7 billion, compared to $65.9 billion for SCHG. These figures indicate substantial scale for both vehicles. However, assets are not the only factor; fee structures, holdings composition, and index methodology remain critical for determining how the fund behaves.

How do the holdings of QQQM and SCHG overlap?

Both ETFs hold eight of their top ten stocks in common: NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, AMZN, AMD, GOOGL, META, and GOOG. While the lists are similar, the specific weights differ. For instance, SCHG holds 10.67% in NVDA, whereas QQQM holds 8.46%. These differences suggest that QQQM follows a Nasdaq 100 benchmark, while SCHG adheres to a broader US large-cap growth index. Investors see a strong overlap in tech-heavy growth names within both portfolios.

What are the concentration risks in these two funds?

Both ETFs exhibit significant concentration in their leading holdings. In SCHG, the top three names (NVDA, AAPL, MSFT) exceed 28% of the portfolio. QQQM also carries a high concentration, with NVDA alone at 8.46% and AAPL at 7.89%. When a fund's performance depends heavily on a few large companies, the entire portfolio's return will follow the trajectory of those specific stocks. This concentration defines the risk profile for both large growth vehicles.

How do the dividend yields compare between the two funds?

Neither fund is typically focused on high income generation. QQQM has a dividend yield of 0.43%, while SCHG sits at 0.36%. The slight difference of 7 basis points is generally small and reflects the underlying companies' profit distribution policies. Both figures suggest that these are growth-oriented vehicles that prioritise capital appreciation through reinvested profits rather than frequent cash distributions to shareholders.

How do the top holdings differ between QQQM and SCHG?

QQQM’s top ten includes semiconductor and internet names like MU, AMD, and TSLA. In contrast, SCHG replaces TSLA with pharmaceutical and semiconductor stocks such as LLY and AVGO. While there is an eight-stock overlap in the top ten, the remaining two positions reflect their respective index mandates. QQQM follows a Nasdaq 100 strategy, while SCHG captures a broader US large-cap growth universe.

What are the main differences in index methodology?

QQQM is associated with the Nasdaq 100 index, typically excluding financial firms and focusing on technology and consumer-oriented companies. SCHG tracks a broader US large-cap growth universe that includes financials and industrials that meet growth criteria. The provided fund data notes the index tracked as 'not available', but these general differences define their exposure. The choice between the two depends on whether an investor wants a tech-heavy index or a wide growth market index.

How do sector weights factor into the comparison?

Sector weights detail the distribution of assets within specific industry groups. Both QQQM and SCHG currently have sector weights marked as 'not available'. Without these details, an investor cannot fully measure the sector exposure. This lack of transparency requires careful attention. However, the high concentration in tech names such as NVDA and AAPL within both funds strongly implies that both vehicles will lean heavily on technology and consumer sectors.

How should a beginner approach comparing these two ETFs?

To compare these ETFs, a beginner should start with the expense ratio, noting QQQM at 0.15% versus SCHG at 0.04%. Next, review the overlap in the top eight holdings, specifically NVDA and AAPL. Investors can then check the dividend yields, which are 0.43% and 0.36% respectively. Since sector weights for both are marked 'not available', the comparison must rely on the listed top holdings and overall asset size, without assuming a specific financial advice outcome.

What educational resources help beginners read ETF comparison pages?

Beginners should study official fund prospectuses to understand expense ratio mechanics and index methodologies. Financial literacy platforms explain terms like 'not available' for sector weights or 'net assets' for fund liquidity. Since the provided FUND DATA marks QQQM's index as 'not available', users should also look at independent research websites that offer transparent methodology breakdowns. Reading comparison pages requires understanding why dividend yields are low and why top holdings like NVDA dominate.

What are the main educational caveats in these fund data figures?

While the figures for SCHG and QQQM provide factual data, they do not account for all variables like tax efficiency or real-time bid-ask spreads. SCHG’s 0.04% expense ratio appears lower than QQQM’s 0.15%, yet investors must consider the total return impact. Since the provided data shows neither fund with a specific dividend growth, income-focused investors should read the prospectus. This information is educational only; investors must consult financial professionals to evaluate risk and portfolio suitability.

QQQM vs SCHG

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

This page compares QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) and SCHG (Schwab US Large-Cap Growth ETF), outlining fees, holdings and dividends. It also examines how each fund tracks its market. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

QQQM

Metric

SCHG

0.15%

Expense Ratio

0.04%

0.43%

Dividend Yield

0.36%

$105.70B

Net Assets

$65.89B

106

Holdings

196

Oct 13, 2020

Inception Date

Dec 11, 2009

–

Index Tracked

–

Large Growth

Fund Category

Large Growth

SCHG costs about $11.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	QQQM	SCHG
NVDANVIDIA Corporation	8.46%	10.67%
AAPLApple Inc.	7.89%	9.94%
MSFTMicrosoft Corporation	5.89%	7.42%
AMZNAmazon.com, Inc.	4.31%	4.93%
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices, Inc.	3.91%	2.76%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc.	3.22%	4.09%
METAMeta Platforms, Inc.	3.22%	3.01%
GOOGAlphabet Inc.	2.99%	3.26%

Discover More Comparisons

QQQM vs SPMO

Compare QQQM and SPMO ETFs. Analyse fees, dividend yields, top holdings and index tracking details. Neutral factual data to support research.

QQQM vs VTI

Compare QQQM and VTI ETFs. Review expense ratios, net assets, dividend yields and top holdings like NVDA and AAPL to understand differences.

QQQM vs VGT

Compare QQQM and VGT. Analyse expense ratios of 0.15% and 0.09%, yields of 0.43% and 0.34%, and shared holdings like NVDA and AAPL to understand tracking.

Investment Analysis

QQQM

Pros

QQQM offers a lower expense ratio than its sister fund QQQ, enhancing cost efficiency for buy-and-hold investors.
It provides broad exposure to the Nasdaq 100, capturing leading technology and innovation-driven companies.
The fund is part of a large asset base, ensuring high liquidity and tighter bid-ask spreads for trading.

Considerations

Its index methodology lacks specific transparency, as the tracked index is listed as not available.
Heavy concentration in top holdings like NVDA and AAPL increases single-stock risk for the portfolio.
The relatively low dividend yield of 0.43% may not appeal to income-focused investors seeking cash flow.

SCHG

Pros

SCHG features an exceptionally low expense ratio of 0.04%, making it a highly cost-efficient growth vehicle.
It tracks a broader US large-cap growth index, potentially offering slightly more diversification than pure Nasdaq funds.
The fund has a longer track record, having been launched in 2009, demonstrating established management experience.

Considerations

Similar to QQQM, its underlying index methodology is not specified in the provided data, lacking clarity.
The top holdings show high concentration, with NVDA, AAPL, and MSFT comprising over 28% of assets.
Its dividend yield of 0.36% is minimal, limiting its suitability for investors requiring regular income generation.

Related Market Insights

Capital Returns: The Shareholder Yield Play

Explore Capital Returns, a Neme focused on companies rewarding shareholders via buybacks & dividends. Invest in robust firms like Schwab with Nemo's thematic baskets.

Aimee Silverwood | Financial Analyst

25 July 2025

Read Insight

Related Market Insights

Capital Returns: The Shareholder Yield Play

Explore Capital Returns, a Neme focused on companies rewarding shareholders via buybacks & dividends. Invest in robust firms like Schwab with Nemo's thematic baskets.

Aimee Silverwood | Financial Analyst

25 July 2025

Read Insight

About QQQM and SCHG

QQQM (QQQM)

The Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) aims to track the performance of the Nasdaq 100 Index, offering investors exposure to a concentrated basket of large-cap growth companies. As a cost-effective version of the well-known Nasdaq exposure, it typically features lower fees than its larger sibling, making it an attractive option for buy-and-hold strategies. The fund holds approximately 106 companies, heavily weighted towards the technology sector, but also including consumer services, health care, and industrials. With net assets exceeding $105 billion, it provides deep liquidity. While historically associated with strong growth during bullish market periods, investors should remember that the underlying companies are subject to market volatility. Values can rise and fall, and returns are not guaranteed. It suits those seeking broad exposure to major US tech and growth innovators, rather than personalised financial advice.

SCHG (SCHG)

SCHG (Schwab US Large‑Cap Growth ETF) is an exchange‑traded fund that offers investors low‑cost exposure to US large‑capitalisation companies exhibiting growth characteristics. It tracks a large‑cap growth index and typically holds companies with higher expected earnings growth, often leading to heavier weights in technology and other growth‑oriented sectors. As an ETF, SCHG provides intraday liquidity, diversification across dozens to hundreds of stocks and a transparent holdings profile. Costs are generally lower than many active funds, but investors should note that growth‑style funds can be more volatile than broad‑market or value strategies and that past performance is not a guide to future returns. SCHG can serve as a growth sleeve within a broader portfolio but may not suit investors seeking high income or very low volatility. This information is educational and not personalised advice; consider your risk tolerance, investment horizon and the role of style and geographic diversification before investing.

Which Baskets Do They Appear In?

Capital Returns: The Shareholder Yield Play

Following Charles Schwab's massive $20 billion stock buyback and dividend increase, this theme focuses on other financially robust companies that are similarly rewarding their investors. The strategy is to invest in firms with strong cash flows and a commitment to returning capital to shareholders.

Published: 25 July 2025

Explore Basket

Which Baskets Do They Appear In?

Capital Returns: The Shareholder Yield Play

Published: 25 July 2025

Explore Basket

Buy QQQM or SCHG in Nemo

🆓

Zero Commission

Trade stocks, ETFs, and more with zero commission. Keep more of your returns.

🔒

Trusted & Regulated

Part of Exinity Group 2015, serving over a million customers globally.

💰

6% Interest on Cash

Earn 6% AER on uninvested cash with daily interest payments.

QQQM vs SCHG

Fund Snapshot