What does it mean when a fund focuses on 'Quality' versus 'Momentum'? These are two distinct investing styles.

SPHQ, representing the 'stock_1', targets companies with high-quality financial characteristics such as strong balance sheets and consistent earnings growth. This approach often seeks stability and resilience. In contrast, SPMO, representing the 'stock_2', focuses on momentum, selecting stocks that have shown strong recent price trends. The goal is to capture gains as investor sentiment and buying pressure continue. Neither style is inherently superior; they represent different methods for selecting constituents within the S&P 500 universe, leading to different portfolio structures and risk profiles for investors.

How do expense ratios like 0.15% and 0.13% impact long-term investment returns?

Expense ratios represent the annual fee charged by the fund manager. For SPHQ ('stock_1'), the fee is 0.15%, while SPMO ('stock_2') charges 0.13%. Although the difference of 0.02 percentage points seems small, it compounds over time. Lower fees mean more of your gross return stays in your pocket. However, the primary driver of total return should be how well the fund's strategy aligns with your market view. When comparing these two specific funds, the cost difference is minimal, so investors typically look more closely at the underlying holdings and strategy differences rather than fees alone.

What does it mean when index tracked information is listed as 'not available'?

For both SPHQ ('stock_1') and SPMO ('stock_2'), the specific index tracked is not available in the provided data. This means we cannot verify the exact methodology or benchmark against a specific named index from the source material. Investors relying on this comparison must recognise that the underlying selection rules driving the portfolio composition—whether based on quality scores or momentum rankings—are not explicitly detailed in this dataset. Consequently, one must rely on the observed top holdings and expense ratios to infer the fund's operational focus rather than comparing against a known index standard.

How do the top holdings of SPHQ and SPMO differ in terms of sector exposure?

The top holdings reveal significant differences in current market positioning. SPHQ ('stock_1') features heavy weights in Mastercard, Apple, and Visa, suggesting a tilt towards consumer discretionary and financials with high quality metrics. SPMO ('stock_2') concentrates on Micron, Nvidia, and Broadcom, indicating a stronger presence in the technology and semiconductor sectors, likely driven by recent price momentum. Sector weights are not available for either fund, so these observations are derived solely from the top ten holdings. This highlights how similar underlying universes can result in very different portfolio exposures based on the chosen factor.

Is there any overlap between the portfolios of SPHQ and SPMO?

Yes, despite their different strategies, there is some overlap. The only company appearing in both funds' top-10 holdings is Lam Research Corporation (LRCX). In SPHQ ('stock_1'), LRCX holds a 3.72% weight, while in SPMO ('stock_2'), it holds a 3.07% weight. This suggests that LRCX meets the criteria for both high quality and positive momentum during the data period. However, the concentration levels differ significantly, with SPMO's top holding, Micron, at 11.09%, far exceeding SPHQ's top holding, Mastercard, at 5.81%. This indicates SPMO currently has a more concentrated top-end exposure relative to its total portfolio.

Why do SPHQ and SPMO have different dividend yields?

SPHQ ('stock_1') has a dividend yield of 1.03%, while SPMO ('stock_2') has a yield of 0.72%. This difference arises from the composition of their holdings. Quality-focused strategies often include mature companies with stable cash flows that pay regular dividends. Momentum strategies, like SPMO, may favour fast-growing tech stocks that reinvest earnings for growth rather than distributing them. Therefore, the yield difference reflects the underlying stock selection philosophy. It is important to remember that dividend yield is not the sole predictor of total return, as capital appreciation can vary significantly between the two strategies.

How does the net asset size of each fund affect an investor?

SPMO ('stock_2') is larger with net assets of $28.9 billion, compared to SPHQ ('stock_1') at $18.6 billion. A larger asset base often indicates higher liquidity and potentially tighter bid-ask spreads for investors buying or selling shares on the secondary market. While SPHQ is still a substantial fund, SPMO's greater size might offer slightly better tradability. However, both funds have inception dates (Dec 2005 for SPHQ and Oct 2015 for SPMO) and asset levels that are robust for institutional and retail use. Size alone does not determine performance, but it can influence execution costs.

Which fund has been in existence longer and why might this matter?

SPHQ ('stock_1') was launched on December 6, 2005, whereas SPMO ('stock_2') was inceptioned later on October 9, 2015. This means SPHQ has approximately ten more years of operational history. A longer track record can provide more data points for assessing how the quality factor performs across different market cycles. SPMO, being newer, has experienced fewer distinct market regimes. Investors often consider inception date when evaluating stability and manager experience, though past performance of the longer-standing fund does not guarantee future results compared to the newer momentum strategy.

How might current concentration levels in SPMO affect risk compared to SPHQ?

SPMO ('stock_2') shows a higher concentration in its top holdings, with Micron at 11.09% and Nvidia at 9.02%. In contrast, SPHQ ('stock_1') has a more evenly distributed top ten, starting with Mastercard at 5.81%. High concentration in a few stocks, particularly in volatile sectors like semiconductors, can increase idiosyncratic risk. If Micron or Nvidia underperform, the impact on SPMO could be more pronounced than the impact of a single stock underperforming in SPHQ. This structural difference means SPMO may exhibit higher volatility related to its specific large tech bets compared to the broader quality tilt of SPHQ.

Since sector weights are not available, how can we infer the market focus?

With sector weights not available for either SPHQ ('stock_1') or SPMO ('stock_2'), investors must infer market focus from top holdings. SPMO's list is heavily skewed towards technology and semiconductors, including Nvidia, Broadcom, AMD, and Micron. SPHQ includes major technology names like Apple and Cisco, but also features strong representation from financials and consumer sectors via Mastercard, Visa, and Costco. This suggests that while both are Large Blend funds, SPMO is currently more exposed to the tech sector's momentum, whereas SPHQ offers a more diversified mix of industrial, financial, and consumer quality leaders.

How should a beginner interpret the differences in holdings data?

Beginners should note that holding weights change frequently. The data provided reflects a specific snapshot as of September 22, 2026. SPHQ ('stock_1') and SPMO ('stock_2') will rebalance according to their respective strategies, meaning current top holdings like Nvidia in SPMO or Apple in SPHQ may shift. It is crucial not to base decisions solely on a single day's holdings. Instead, understand that these lists indicate the fund's current emphasis. Checking these lists regularly helps investors see if the fund is staying true to its quality or momentum objective, providing transparency into what they actually own.

What is the significance of the 'Large Blend' category for these two funds?

Both SPHQ ('stock_1') and SPMO ('stock_2') are categorised as Large Blend ETFs. This indicates they primarily invest in large-cap companies and may mix growth and value characteristics depending on their specific factor strategies. Unlike pure Growth or Value ETFs, a Large Blend designation suggests they target the broad large-cap market but with a quantitative overlay. For SPHQ, the overlay is quality; for SPMO, it is momentum. This classification helps investors place these funds within their broader asset allocation, typically replacing or complementing a standard S&P 500 index fund within the core equity portion of a portfolio.

SPHQ vs SPMO

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

Compare SPHQ and SPMO to review fees, holdings, dividends, and how each fund tracks its market. SPHQ focuses on quality; SPMO targets momentum. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

SPHQ

Metric

SPMO

0.15%

Expense Ratio

0.13%

1.03%

Dividend Yield

0.72%

$18.62B

Net Assets

$28.85B

102

Holdings

102

Dec 6, 2005

Inception Date

Oct 9, 2015

–

Index Tracked

–

Large Blend

Fund Category

Large Blend

SPMO costs about $2.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	SPHQ	SPMO
LRCXLam Research Corporation	3.72%	3.07%

Discover More Comparisons

SPHQ vs SPY

Compare SPHQ and SPY to review fees, holdings, and dividends. SPHQ charges 0.15% versus 0.09% for SPY, with net assets of 18.6 and 785 billion.

SPHQ vs VOO

Compare SPHQ vs VOO on expenses, holdings and yields. Both 1.03% yield; fees differ 0.15% vs 0.03%. Assess large blend strategies for informed research.

SPHQ vs VTV

Compare SPHQ vs VTV on fees, holdings, and dividends. Review net assets, yields, and inception dates. Learn differences between Quality and Value funds.

Investment Analysis

SPHQ

Pros

Expense ratio is 0.15%.
Net assets are $18.6 billion.
Dividend yield is 1.03%.

Considerations

Index tracked information is not available.
Sector weights are not available.
Top holdings include high concentration in Mastercard, Apple, and Visa.

SPMO

Pros

Expense ratio is 0.13%.
Net assets are $28.9 billion.
Dividend yield is 0.72%.

Considerations

Index tracked information is not available.
Sector weights are not available.
Top holdings include high concentration in Micron, Nvidia, and Broadcom.

Related Market Insights

Fed Policy Shift Explained: Defensive Investment Guide

Navigate Fed policy shifts with Nemo's defensive investing guide. Discover stable sectors like consumer staples & healthcare to protect your portfolio amid economic uncertainty.

Aimee Silverwood | Financial Analyst

5 October 2025

Read Insight

Related Market Insights

Fed Policy Shift Explained: Defensive Investment Guide

Navigate Fed policy shifts with Nemo's defensive investing guide. Discover stable sectors like consumer staples & healthcare to protect your portfolio amid economic uncertainty.

Aimee Silverwood | Financial Analyst

5 October 2025

Read Insight

About SPHQ and SPMO

SPHQ (SPHQ)

Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF (SPHQ) is a passively managed exchange-traded fund that seeks exposure to S&P 500 companies exhibiting quality characteristics such as stronger profitability, stable earnings and lower leverage. It provides investors with a rules-based, diversified way to tilt a large-cap US equity allocation towards firms deemed higher quality within the S&P 500. SPHQ trades like a stock on exchanges, offering intraday liquidity and the convenience of an ETF wrapper, but its share price and NAV can diverge slightly during the trading day. Investors should note this is not an actively managed stockpick — performance follows the underlying index and will rise or fall with market conditions. Consideration should be given to how a quality tilt fits within a broader portfolio, fees, tax treatment and the ETF’s liquidity; past performance does not guarantee future returns and values can go down as well as up.

SPMO (SPMO)

The Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF offers investors exposure to companies within the S&P 500 index that have demonstrated stronger price performance compared to the broader market in recent times. By focusing on stocks with positive momentum trends, the fund aims to capture opportunities in sectors or companies currently experiencing growth or renewed interest. It holds approximately 102 companies, reflecting a diversified approach within the large-cap category. With a low expense ratio of 0.13%, it provides a cost-effective way to gain this specific type of market exposure. Investors should note that while momentum strategies can perform well during trending markets, they may underperform during market reversals or periods of volatility. Values can rise and fall, and past performance is not a guarantee of future results. This ETF is suitable for those interested in understanding systematic investment approaches, keeping risk tolerance in mind.

Which Baskets Do They Appear In?

Fed Policy Shift Explained: Defensive Investment Guide

A recent warning from a top Federal Reserve official about a weakening U.S. job market suggests a cautious approach to future monetary policy. This pivot could create investment opportunities in defensive, high-quality companies that can better withstand economic uncertainty.

Published: 5 October 2025

Explore Basket

Which Baskets Do They Appear In?

Fed Policy Shift Explained: Defensive Investment Guide

Published: 5 October 2025

Explore Basket

Buy SPHQ or SPMO 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.

SPHQ vs SPMO

Fund Snapshot