SCHG vs QQQ ETF Comparison 2026: Cheapest Growth ETF vs Most Liquid: AI Score, Valuation, Performance and Upside
SCHG and QQQ are both large-cap US growth ETFs with heavily overlapping holdings — about 62% overlap by weight and a 0.90 price correlation, so the two funds move almost identically. The real differences are expense ratio (SCHG 0.04% vs QQQ 0.18%), breadth (SCHG's ~197 holdings and NYSE-eligible names vs QQQ's 100 Nasdaq-only stocks), sector concentration (QQQ ~65% tech vs SCHG ~58%), and liquidity/options market (QQQ dominates with ~$450B+ AUM vs SCHG's ~$60B). For long-term buy-and-hold investors, SCHG's cost advantage compounds significantly with almost identical exposure. For options strategies or maximum institutional liquidity, QQQ remains the standard.
SCHG vs QQQ — SCHG provides large-cap US growth factor exposure at 0.04% expense ratio with broader ~197-stock diversification including NYSE-listed names (Schwab Growth) versus the NASDAQ-100 ETF at 0.18% expense ratio with deeper liquidity, the world's most liquid equity ETF options market, and institutional benchmark recognition (QQQ) — despite a 0.90 correlation and 62% holdings overlap, this is lowest-cost growth factor exposure vs maximum options liquidity and benchmark recognition.
QQQ holds the edge across 3 of 5 key metrics in this comparison. QQQ has delivered stronger 1-year price return (+21.77% vs +12.13% for SCHG).
- prefer the lowest-cost large-cap US growth ETF at 0.04% expense ratio — maximizing long-term compounding without paying for options liquidity they don't need
- value slightly broader diversification of ~197 stocks and a lower ~58% tech weighting vs QQQ's 100-stock, ~65%-tech NASDAQ-100 concentration
- want large-cap growth exposure with mostly the same mega-cap tech holdings as QQQ (Apple, Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon) at a fraction of the cost
- are comfortable with lower AUM and daily trading volume vs QQQ, and minimal options market for SCHG
- need the world's most liquid equity ETF options market for covered call income generation, protective put hedging, or complex options strategies on growth ETF exposure
- make large institutional trades where QQQ's minimal bid-ask spread vs thinner alternatives saves more than the 0.14% expense ratio difference
- want the recognized global NASDAQ-100 benchmark for performance attribution and growth equity measurement
- are comfortable with the 0.18% expense ratio understanding they are paying for options market depth and institutional liquidity rather than pure index exposure
| Metric | SCHG | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| ETF scorei | 70.0 | 81.0 |
| Latest closei | $35.43 | $721.45 |
| 1M returni | -0.08% | +0.75% |
| 6M returni | +21.24% | +24.24% |
| 1Y returni | +12.13% | +21.77% |
The ETF score weights long-term returns and risk-adjusted performance most heavily, but still rewards low expense ratios, larger fund size, and broader diversification — so it can favor low-cost, broad, mega-cap funds over smaller thematic or actively-managed funds even when the latter have delivered stronger returns.
How much would $10,000 be worth today if invested at the start of each period, with all dividends reinvested?
| Period | SCHG | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y ago | $11.26K (+12.6%) started 2025-09-18 | $12.24K (+22.4%) started 2025-09-18 |
| 5Y ago | $19.59K (+95.9%) started 2021-09-20 | $20.93K (+109.3%) started 2021-09-20 |
| 10Y ago | $59.54K (+495.4%) started 2016-09-19 | $70.75K (+607.5%) started 2016-09-19 |
Hypothetical — past performance does not guarantee future results.
| Metric | SCHG | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratioi | 0.04% | 0.18% |
| Total assets (AUM)i | $63.03B | $488.98B |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.37% | 0.42% |
| Trailing P/Ei | 29.19 | 29.41 |
| Betai | 1.20 | 1.24 |
| 52-week change | 12.13% | 21.77% |
| Metric | SCHG | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y returni | +12.13% | +21.77% |
| 6M returni | +21.24% | +24.24% |
| 1M returni | -0.08% | +0.75% |
| 1Y Sharpe ratio | 0.50 | 0.87 |
| Betai | 1.20 | 1.24 |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.37% | 0.42% |
| 5Y CAGR | +13.88% | +15.24% |
Over the past year, SCHG and QQQ have moved strongly in the same direction (correlation of 0.89), based on daily returns.
Lower drawdown and smaller single-period drops generally indicate a smoother ride, though they do not guarantee lower future risk.
| Period | Metric | SCHG | QQQ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Y | Growthi | +12.13% | +21.77% |
| CAGRi | +12.14% | +21.79% | |
| Volatilityi | 16.67% | 19.69% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | 0.50 | 0.87 | |
| Sortino ratioi | 0.71 | 1.27 | |
| Max drawdowni | 16.41% | 11.96% | |
| Current drawdowni | 1.42% | 3.21% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 3.86% | 3.15% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 5.21% | 4.00% | |
| Max daily dropi | 3.35% | 4.80% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 5.52% | 6.79% | |
| 5Y | Growthi | +91.37% | +103.05% |
| CAGRi | +13.88% | +15.24% | |
| Volatilityi | 22.46% | 22.98% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | 0.49 | 0.54 | |
| Sortino ratioi | 0.70 | 0.77 | |
| Max drawdowni | 34.59% | 35.12% | |
| Current drawdowni | 1.42% | 3.21% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 9.50% | 9.18% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 13.82% | 13.59% | |
| Max daily dropi | 6.11% | 6.21% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 12.33% | 11.98% | |
| 10Y | Growthi | +454.22% | +560.40% |
| CAGRi | +18.69% | +20.79% | |
| Volatilityi | 21.60% | 22.54% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | 0.70 | 0.75 | |
| Sortino ratioi | 0.98 | 1.07 | |
| Max drawdowni | 34.59% | 35.12% | |
| Current drawdowni | 1.42% | 3.21% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 6.25% | 6.23% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 10.50% | 10.38% | |
| Max daily dropi | 12.55% | 11.98% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 17.06% | 16.20% |
| Category | SCHG | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Fund name | Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | Invesco QQQ Trust |
| Type | ETF | ETF |
| Expense ratioi | 0.04% | 0.18% |
| Total assets (AUM)i | $63.03B | $488.98B |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.37% | 0.42% |
- 0.04% expense ratio: SCHG is the cheapest growth-factor ETF available — matching Vanguard's VUG and roughly 4.5x cheaper than QQQ's 0.18%
- Includes NYSE-listed growth names QQQ can never own (its index is Nasdaq-only), plus Alphabet, Meta, and other communication services mega-caps excluded from pure-tech ETFs like VGT
- Broader large-cap growth with ~197 holdings vs QQQ's 100-stock concentration, and a lower ~58% tech weighting vs QQQ's ~65%
- Institutional-grade liquidity: QQQ's ~$450B+ AUM and heavy daily dollar volume make it among the most traded US ETFs — minimal bid-ask spread even for large institutional trades
- World's most liquid equity ETF options market: QQQ's options depth enables covered calls, protective puts, and complex strategies unavailable in SCHG
- NASDAQ-100 benchmark recognition: QQQ is the recognized benchmark for technology and growth fund performance globally
- Less liquid than QQQ: SCHG has meaningfully lower AUM (~$60B vs QQQ's ~$450B+) and daily trading volume — bid-ask spreads slightly wider for large trades
- 62% holdings overlap by weight with QQQ (0.90 price correlation) means SCHG isn't a true diversifier if you already hold QQQ — the two funds move almost identically
- No meaningful options market: SCHG lacks the deep options liquidity that QQQ offers for covered call and hedging strategies
- 0.18% expense ratio is roughly 4.5x SCHG's 0.04%: over 30 years, QQQ's additional expense is significant for long-term buy-and-hold investors
- Most long-term investors should use QQQM instead: Invesco's cheaper QQQM provides identical NASDAQ-100 exposure at 0.15% — even QQQ buyers should consider QQQM unless they specifically need QQQ's deeper options liquidity
- 100-stock, ~65%-tech concentration creates a more concentrated portfolio than SCHG's broader ~197-holding, ~58%-tech mix
SCHG vs QQQ: Which Growth ETF Should You Buy?
SCHG and QQQ aren't really competing strategies — they're two ways to buy nearly the same portfolio at very different prices. With a 0.90 price correlation and roughly 62% holdings overlap by weight, the two funds track each other closely day to day. The meaningful differences are cost, breadth, and liquidity, not exposure.
SCHG's Dow Jones growth index holds around 197 stocks, including NYSE-listed growth names that the Nasdaq-only QQQ structurally can't own, and runs a slightly lower ~58% technology weighting versus QQQ's ~65%. That gets you essentially the same mega-cap AI and tech exposure — Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Amazon, Meta, Alphabet, Broadcom — for a 0.04% expense ratio instead of QQQ's 0.18%, a roughly 4.5x cost difference that compounds meaningfully over decades.
QQQ's edge isn't index construction — it's market structure. QQQ remains the world's most liquid equity ETF options market, making it the standard for covered calls, protective puts, and institutional block trades where execution quality matters more than a few basis points of expense ratio.
Want deeper AI forecasts?
This comparison page is public and free forever. Subscribers can unlock saved watchlists, full AI rankings, detailed forecasts, and interactive analysis tools.