Skip to Content
ETF Comparisons

XLK vs. QQQJ

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund

XLK
$--
vs

Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF

QQQJ
$--

Correlation

Compare with

Top 10 comparisons with XLK:
Compare:
XLK
Correlation
With:
QQQJ
Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF
SwitchTECLDirexion Shares ETF Trust - Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X Shares1.00FTECFidelity Covington Trust - Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF1.00VGTVanguard Group, Inc. - Vanguard Information Technology ETF1.00IXNBlackRock Institutional Trust Company N.A. - iShares Global Tech ETF0.99ROMProShares Trust - ProShares Ultra Technology 2x Shares0.99IYWBlackRock Institutional Trust Company N.A. - iShares U.S. Technology ETF0.99IGMBlackRock Institutional Trust Company N.A. - iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF0.97QQQInvesco Capital Management LLC - Invesco QQQ Trust Series 10.97TQQQProShares Trust - ProShares UltraPro QQQ 3x Shares0.97QLDProShares Trust - ProShares Ultra QQQ 2x Shares0.97

Top 10 shared holdings

The top 10 holdings shared by XLK and QQQJ:

There are no shared holdings.
Invest with XLK
Learn more about QQQJ
XLKTechnology Select Sector SPDR Fund
QQQJInvesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF

What is XLK?

The Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund before expenses seeks to closely match the returns and characteristics of the Technology Select Sector Index (ticker: IXT).

Snapshot
**

XLK Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund
QQQJ Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF
Inception date
Dec 16 1998
Oct 13 2020
Expense ratio
0.10%
0.15%
XLK has a lower expense ratio than QQQJ by 0.04%. This can indicate that it’s cheaper to invest in XLK than QQQJ.
Type
US Equities
US Equities
XLK targets investing in US Equities, while QQQJ targets investing in US Equities.
Fund owner
State Street (SPDR)
Invesco
XLK is managed by State Street (SPDR), while QQQJ is managed by Invesco.
Volume (1m avg. daily)
$989,437,675
$1,918,273
XLK is considered a high-volume asset, while ETF2 is low-volume. Low-volume assets will suffer from poor execution price – you can find a high-volume alternative ETF in QQQJ’s related ETFs section.
AUM
$47,537,945,579
$653,701,993
XLK has more assets under management than QQQJ by $46,884,243,586. Higher AUM can be associated with better liquidity and lower slippage in trading.
Associated index
S&P Technology Select Sector Index
NASDAQ Next Generation 100 Index
XLK is based off of the S&P Technology Select Sector Index, while QQQJ is based off of the NASDAQ Next Generation 100 Index
Inverse/Leveraged
No
No
XLK and QQQJ use the same leverage ratio. Inverse and leveraged ETFs can be used to either take an opposite position or amplify returns of a given index.
Passive/Active
Passive
Passive
XLK and QQQJ both use a Passive investing strategy. In an actively managed fund, the fund manager makes decisions about how funds are invested. A passively managed fund typically tries to track or follow a market index.
Dividend
No
No
XLK and QQQJ may offer dividends. The frequency and yield of the dividend may not be the same.
Prospectus
View
View
Neither XLK nor QQQJ require a K1.

Automated Strategies
Related toXLK

#BTD

Buy the Dips: Nasdaq 100

Category

Featured, Technology Focus

Risk Rating

Aggressive

Automated Strategies
Related toQQQJ

#GLOBE

Follow the Global Trend

Category

Momentum, Lever Up, Go Global, Diversification

Risk Rating

Moderate

Create your own algorithmic
trading strategy

Disclaimers

*

We show information directly obtained from our data provider, Xignite. Data shown here is provided by Xignite, an unaffiliated third party. Composer believes the information shown here is reliable, but has not been verified and there is no guarantee that the information is accurate.

**

We show information based on calculations performed by Composer using data from our provider. Information provided here is based on calculations performed by Composer using data sourced from Xignite, an unaffiliated third party. Composer believes this information is reliable, but has not verified the data and there is no guarantee that the calculations are accurate.