IQQ vs. QNDX – New Nasdaq 100 ETFs Compared + QQQ/QQQM

IQQ and QNDX are two new ETFs for the Nasdaq 100 Index from iShares and State Street respectively. Here I'll review their details, compare them, and see how they stack up against the stalwarts QQQ and QQQM from Invesco.

Disclosure:  Some of the links on this page are referral links. At no additional cost to you, if you choose to make a purchase or sign up for a service after clicking through those links, I may receive a small commission. This allows me to continue producing high-quality content on this site and pays for the occasional cup of coffee. I have first-hand experience with every product or service I recommend, and I recommend them because I genuinely believe they are useful, not because of the commission I may get. Read more here.

IQQ vs. QNDX – Quick Comparison Table

Before we get into the details of IQQ vs. QNDX, here's the quick comparison table:

Data as of August 2026.

A few line items in that table are going to look outdated within a month or two given how young these funds are. I'd expect AUM to take off quickly on these.

IQQ vs. QNDX – Intro

IQQ and QNDX are two ETFs from iShares/BlackRock and State Street respectively that both seek to track the Nasdaq 100 Index. As we'd expect, they're close enough to be fraternal twins.

The punchline here is that Invesco previously owned this space for decades with exclusive licensing so this is a pretty big deal considering QQQ costs 0.18% and QQQM costs 0.15%. IQQ and QNDX are cheaper; both cost 0.10%.

The Nasdaq 100 Index is comprised of the 100 largest non-financial companies by market cap that trade on the NASDAQ exchange. It has attracted assets in recent years while U.S. tech has done extraordinarily well. The index defines itself as companies “on the forefront of innovation.”

Next we'll talk about why these funds launched in the first place.

Why Do IQQ and QNDX Exist? A Brief History Lesson

So why did IQQ and QNDX launch in the first place?

Previously Nasdaq exclusively licensed the Nasdaq 100 Index to Invesco, who brought us QQQ decades ago, previously the only ETF to access the index, and then later followed up with the cheaper QQQM. I've got a post comparing those two here.

QQQ had an expense ratio of 0.20% for a long time until 2025 when it dropped to 0.18%. QQQM launched in 2020 with a fee of 0.15%, which made waves at the time for being 25% cheaper than its older brother.

The published reasoning is diplomatically vague, but it sounds like Nasdaq wanted to finally open up competition to bring in more revenue. BlackRock and State Street capitalized on that decision pretty quickly.

Enter IQQ and QNDX. Filing and launch of these two were pretty quick and quiet. Details were sparse initially and we only had the SEC filings from which to extract any salient info. It was pretty questionable whether or not they'd actually get approved, but here we are.

The main lever to be pulled here is obviously the fee. 0.15% for QQQM still wasn't exactly what we'd call cheap. So now we have two new products that are 33% cheaper than that at 0.10%, meaning retailers can hold on to a few more dollars when accessing the NDX for a long term hold.

To its credit, Invesco didn't exactly wait around to get blindsided. QQQ converted from its old unit investment trust structure to a standard open-end ETF in December 2025 and cut its fee from 0.20% to 0.18%. It also picked up the ability to do things regular ETFs can do, like reinvest dividends promptly and lend out securities. That was widely read as a preemptive move ahead of the new competition.

But of course retailers are focused on QQQM anyway, which hasn't changed, so the QQQ changes were a bit of a red herring in my opinion; it's mostly used by institutions and traders for its greater liquidity. If I were a betting man, I think it's a reasonable assumption that QQQM will lower its fee within the next year to remain competitive.

Next we'll specifically cover the similarities of IQQ and QNDX.

IQQ vs. QNDX – Similarities

So as we've hinted at so far, IQQ and QNDX are very similar open-end ETFs to track the Nasdaq 100 Index.

Both use a sampling strategy rather than full replication, meaning the funds aren't obligated to hold every single stock in the index at all times. For a liquid, well-covered large-cap index like the Nasdaq-100, this is unlikely to cause meaningful tracking error, but it's worth knowing it's not doing exactly what QQQ and QQQM do under the hood.

At current, IQQ has twice the assets compared to QNDX, but again, once these grow, I don't think this will be a concern anyway.

Options chain is thin for both, as we'd expect, but traders will be using QQQ for that anyway.

Both BlackRock and State Street are enormous, financially stable index-fund operators. Neither is going anywhere. So choice of issuer isn't really a concern either.

In the next section, we'll go over the subtle differences between IQQ and QNDX.

IQQ vs. QNDX – Are There Any Differences?

So are there any actual, tangible differences between IQQ and QNDX? There are, but they're pretty small nuances.

Don't go looking for any secret sauce to selection methodology or anything like that. Both are pretty straightforwardly replicating the Nasdaq 100 via sampling, and both are open-end ETFs. The comparison of QQQ and QQQM is much more nuanced than what we're looking at here.

The only real difference is what we've touched on as the headline so far: the fee. IQQ has a fee waiver of 0.02% in place so its 0.10% is net, not gross. QNDX, on the other hand, has a real, stated rate of 0.10%. So QNDX's low fee is arguably more durable. We'll see.

QNDX also has a slightly larger securities lending ceiling (up to 40% of net assets versus IQQ's 33.3%) and pays income distributions quarterly rather than “at least annually.” Neither of these should be material game-changers, as NDX stocks are large and liquid.

In my opinion, there's no reliable reason to choose one over the other, but I'd probably choose one of these over QQQM to get that lower fee.

Next we'll look at the broader comparison of 4 offerings for the Nasdaq 100: IQQ, QNDX, QQQ, and QQQM.

IQQ vs. QNDX vs. QQQ vs. QQQM

Now that you know IQQ and QNDX are nearly identical, you're probably curious how they stack up to QQQ and QQQM. Here's a table with the quick stats, and then I'll go into the details below .

Let's highlight the salient differences:

• Fees – The newcomers win. QNDX and IQQ (for now) sit at 0.10%. QQQM is 0.15%. QQQ is 0.18%. On a $100,000 position, that's the difference between roughly $100/year (IQQ or QNDX) and $180/year (QQQ). That's not nothing, but it's also not life-changing. Remember QNDX may have a more durable fee here because IQQ's net fee is after a 0.02% waiver that may go away.
• Liquidity – It's not close. QQQ owns it thanks to 25+ years of being the Nasdaq-100 trading vehicle of choice for everyone from retail investors to institutional options traders. QQQM, while much smaller than QQQ, has still built up over $100 billion in assets and tight spreads since its 2020 launch. IQQ and QNDX, being brand new, have spreads roughly 3-4x wider. But for a long-term buy-and-hold investor making periodic contributions, that spread cost is a rounding error; it's $4 on a $10,000 order. For anyone trading more actively or making large lump-sum purchases, QQQ should likely be preferred.
• Options – Again, QQQ remains in a league of its own for its options chain. It's one of the most actively traded options underlyings in the market.
• Replication – This is not really a material concern but it's arguably worth noting that IQQ and QNDX can also get away with charging less because they're sampling the NDX instead of fully replicating it like QQQ and QQQM. Full replication means the fund buys and holds every single stock in the index, in exactly the index's weights, all the time. Representative sampling means the fund doesn't commit to holding every constituent at all times, but instead holds a subset (or occasionally alters weights) chosen to statistically track the index's risk/return characteristics. But it's worth noting that “sampling” is largely just legal boilerplate in this context with large, liquid stocks. It reserves flexibility but it doesn't mandate it. The prospectus may say “sampling” while the fund holds 100% of the index.

All four funds track the Nasdaq 100, are from huge providers, and share the same structure. So logistics, tax efficiency, and relative safety are roughly the same and should not be sources of concern.

The next section is a table translating the fee differences into actual dollars.

IQQ vs. QNDX vs. QQQ vs. QQQM – The Fee Gap in Dollars

I mentioned the fee is the headline here. So let's look at exactly how that fee impacts our investment in dollars over time.

Napkin math assuming 8% annual gross return, fees deducted annually, for illustration only.

For long term holders, QQQM costs 5 bps more than IQQ or QNDX, so for someone investing $500/month over 20 years, that fee savings is going to be about $5,000.

Tax Loss Harvesting and Wash Sale Rule

I noted in my post on QQQM that it and QQQ may be considered identical enough to trigger a wash sale that would disallow harvesting losses between the two.

The details of tax loss harvesting are beyond the scope of this post, but basically you can get a tax break by realizing losses (“harvesting”) but the IRS says you can't do this if you swap the position for another security that is “substantially identical” within 30 days.

Now I think we've got a defensible difference with IQQ and QNDX being from completely different providers and using different replication, so this is a convenient bonus for QQQ or QQQM owners needing to harvest losses confidently.

That said, I'm not a CPA, so consult yours.

Conclusion – Which One Should You Buy?

So which one should you buy?

If you're a day trader or you're buying a huge block of shares, I think QQQ is still likely the best choice for the smaller spread, greater liquidity, and deeper options market.

If you're a retail investor looking to buy and hold the NASDAQ 100 Index, QNDX and IQQ look nice to me over the now-more-expensive QQQM. But again, don't be surprised at all if Invesco lowers QQQM's fee to match soon.

To reiterate one more reminder, none of these funds is a substitute for a diversified portfolio. The NASDAQ-100 is heavily concentrated in tech and communication stocks, has a P/E premium over the broad market, and has experienced drawdowns as severe as 80%+ historically. It's a calculated bet on a specific part of the U.S. stock market, not a core holding.

Conveniently, all of these funds should be available at any major broker, including M1 Finance, which is the one I'm usually suggesting around here.

Do you hold any of these ETFs in your portfolio? Let me know in the comments.

Disclaimer:  While I love diving into investing-related data and playing around with backtests, this is not financial advice, investing advice, or tax advice. The information on this website is for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only. Investment products discussed (ETFs, mutual funds, etc.) are for illustrative purposes only. It is not a research report. It is not a recommendation to buy, sell, or otherwise transact in any of the products mentioned. I always attempt to ensure the accuracy of information presented but that accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Do your own due diligence. I mention M1 Finance a lot around here. M1 does not provide investment advice, and this is not an offer or solicitation of an offer, or advice to buy or sell any security, and you are encouraged to consult your personal investment, legal, and tax advisors. Hypothetical examples used, such as historical backtests, do not reflect any specific investments, are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be considered an offer to buy or sell any products. All investing involves risk, including the risk of losing the money you invest. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of other parties mentioned. Read my lengthier disclaimer here.