QQQ vs VONG: 58% overlap
Invesco QQQ Trust and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF share 58.5% of their portfolios by weight — computed as Σ min(wA, wB) over every holding both funds own.
Different holding dates. These holdings were published 27 days apart — VONG as of 2026-06-30, the rest through 2026-07-27. 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
QQQ and VONG hold 63 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in QQQ | in VONG | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDA | 7.9% | 13.8% | 5.9% |
| AAPL | 8.3% | 6.7% | 1.6% |
| MSFT | 4.8% | 4.1% | 0.7% |
| MU | 4.7% | 3.9% | 0.8% |
| GOOGL | 3.2% | 6.2% | 3.0% |
| AVGO | 3.0% | 5.2% | 2.2% |
| GOOG | 3.0% | 5.0% | 2.0% |
| META | 2.9% | 3.0% | 0.1% |
| AMD | 3.7% | 2.8% | 0.9% |
| TSLA | 2.6% | 3.6% | 1.1% |
Where QQQ and VONG 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 | QQQ | VONG | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consumer Staples | 6.7% | 1.3% | +5.4pp |
| Industrials | 3.7% | 8.8% | −5.2pp |
| Financials | 0.2% | 4.3% | −4.0pp |
| Information Technology | 57.9% | 54.3% | +3.6pp |
| Communication Services | 13.5% | 16.1% | −2.6pp |
| Consumer Discretionary | 10.2% | 8.2% | +2.0pp |
| Health Care | 3.8% | 5.4% | −1.6pp |
| Unclassified | 1.1% | 0.0% | +1.1pp |
Δ is QQQ minus VONG, 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
19.0% of QQQ by weight, held in no part of VONG.
27.1% of VONG by weight, held in no part of QQQ.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| QQQ | VONG | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 45.7% | 54.3% |
| Positions held | 104 | 370 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $20 | $6 |
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 QQQ and VONG overlap?
QQQ and VONG overlap 58.5% by portfolio weight — substantial duplication if you hold both. They share 63 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (QQQ as of 2026-07-27, VONG as of 2026-06-30).
How is the overlap between QQQ and VONG calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If QQQ holds a stock at 6% and VONG 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 QQQ and VONG?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 58.5% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does QQQ own that VONG doesn't?
QQQ holds 104 positions and VONG holds 370; 41 of QQQ's positions don't appear in VONG at all, and they are 19.0% of QQQ by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares QQQ and VONG. 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 QQQ vs VONG
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, QQQ as of 2026-07-27, VONG as of 2026-06-30. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.