MGK vs QQQM: 60% overlap
Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF share 60.3% of their portfolios by weight — computed as Σ min(wA, wB) over every holding both funds own.
Different holding dates. These holdings were published about 4 months apart — QQQM as of 2026-02-28, the rest through 2026-06-30. Each fund is compared using its most recent file, so any trading in between shows up as a difference.
You would hold two tickers and get the diversification of 1.4. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
MGK and QQQM hold 34 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in MGK | in QQQM | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDA | 13.2% | 8.4% | 4.9% |
| AAPL | 12.1% | 7.6% | 4.5% |
| MSFT | 7.5% | 5.7% | 1.8% |
| AMZN | 4.4% | 4.4% | 0.1% |
| TSLA | 3.9% | 3.9% | 0.0% |
| META | 4.1% | 3.7% | 0.4% |
| GOOGL | 5.9% | 3.5% | 2.4% |
| GOOG | 4.6% | 3.3% | 1.4% |
| AVGO | 4.3% | 2.9% | 1.3% |
| AMD | 3.2% | 1.7% | 1.4% |
Where MGK and QQQM differ
Sector weights as a share of each fund, ordered by the size of the gap rather than the size of the sector — two funds that overlap heavily still usually diverge somewhere.
| Sector | MGK | QQQM | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 58.6% | 48.9% | +9.7pp |
| Consumer Staples | 0.4% | 8.5% | −8.1pp |
| Financials | 4.0% | 0.2% | +3.7pp |
| Unclassified | 0.0% | 2.7% | −2.7pp |
| Utilities | 0.0% | 1.6% | −1.6pp |
| Real Estate | 1.2% | 0.1% | +1.1pp |
| Materials | 0.4% | 1.3% | −0.9pp |
| Cash & Other | 0.0% | 0.8% | −0.8pp |
Δ is MGK minus QQQM, in percentage points. Sector data is not published by every issuer, so “Unclassified” is a real category rather than a gap in the table.
What each fund holds alone
19.1% of MGK by weight, held in no part of QQQM.
35.8% of QQQM by weight, held in no part of MGK.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| MGK | QQQM | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 63.5% | 46.7% |
| Positions held | 57 | 103 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $5 | $15 |
Cost is the expense ratio applied to $10,000; it excludes any brokerage commission, bid-ask spread or tax consequence. Figures are facts about the funds, not a suggestion about which to hold.
Frequently asked
How much do MGK and QQQM overlap?
MGK and QQQM overlap 60.3% by portfolio weight — substantial duplication if you hold both. They share 34 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (MGK as of 2026-06-30, QQQM as of 2026-02-28).
How is the overlap between MGK and QQQM calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If MGK holds a stock at 6% and QQQM holds the same stock at 4%, 4% counts as shared. The result is bounded between 0% and 100%, and it is computed after looking through any fund-of-funds to the underlying holdings.
Is it redundant to hold both MGK and QQQM?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 60.3% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does MGK own that QQQM doesn't?
MGK holds 57 positions and QQQM holds 103; 23 of MGK's positions don't appear in QQQM at all, and they are 19.1% of MGK by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares MGK and QQQM. Paste your whole portfolio — brokerage, 401(k), IRA — and see the overlap across every fund at once, plus what you actually own underneath them and your own Effective Funds number. Free, no account, nothing stored.
X-ray my portfolio — free →Watch MGK vs QQQM
We re-read both funds’ published holdings every weeknight. Leave an address and we'll tell you when what's inside actually changes.
Not sending yet — email alerts are built but switched off, and you'll be among the first when they turn on. No spam, one-click unsubscribe.
Related comparisons
Sources: issuer holdings files, MGK as of 2026-06-30, QQQM as of 2026-02-28. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.