Invesco QQQ Trust(QQQ)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedThe portfolio's sector allocation reflects its focus on high-growth industries, with technology and communication services dominating at 63.1%. This is consistent with the fund's large growth category classification. The weighted P/E ratio of 32.2x suggests that the underlying stocks are trading at a premium to their historical averages, while the weighted P/B ratio of 16.20x indicates a similarly elevated valuation posture.
The top holdings reveal significant concentration risk, particularly in technology and consumer cyclical sectors. NVDA and AAPL alone account for over 16% of the portfolio's weight, with MSFT not far behind at around 5.6%. This level of single-stock dominance increases the fund's sensitivity to idiosyncratic risks. The sector mix also diverges from the broader market, which may be a consideration in certain macro environments. A favorable backdrop for this portfolio would likely involve sustained growth and innovation in its core sectors, while an unfavorable environment might arise from increased regulatory scrutiny or economic downturns that disproportionately impact these industries.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-06-12 07:10:37.319108+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 95/100The Invesco QQQ Trust maintains a highly coherent alignment with its implied theme of tracking the Nasdaq-100, which is heavily weighted toward large-cap growth companies in technology and innovation. The top holdings are overwhelmingly concentrated within the Technology sector at nearly half of the portfolio's assets, reinforcing the fund's identity as a proxy for digital transformation leaders like NVIDIA, Apple, and Microsoft. While some positions such as Costco fall under Consumer Defensive or Amazon and Tesla sit in Consumer Cyclical, these allocations remain consistent with the Nasdaq-100 methodology rather than deviating from the core technological narrative. The portfolio avoids unrelated industries entirely, ensuring that every significant holding contributes to a tech-centric exposure without diluting the thematic focus through random diversification into sectors like utilities or energy beyond minimal representation.
Concentration risk is elevated due to the dominance of mega-cap stocks and sector overlap with broad market indices, yet this structure reflects the intentional design of tracking an index rather than indicating poor fund management. The top ten holdings account for nearly half of total assets, creating a reliance on specific large-cap names that drives volatility correlated closely with the broader Nasdaq-100 performance. Sector weights show strong internal consistency where Technology and Communication Services combine to form over sixty percent of the portfolio, distinguishing it from diversified broad-market funds but mirroring the inherent skew of its underlying index. The fund does not appear to use thematic naming merely as a vehicle for general market exposure; instead, its composition accurately mirrors the specific weightings found in Nasdaq-100 constituents, offering investors precise access to that particular slice of the equity universe without artificial deviation from benchmark methodology.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-23 17:06:28.748254+00
⚠️ Systemic Risk Synthesis
AI GeneratedThe newly disclosed risk factors from the top holdings of Invesco QQQ Trust highlight three converging macro-level threats that could impact a significant portion of the fund's portfolio. The most prominent shared concern is regulatory pressure surrounding emerging technologies, specifically artificial intelligence and data privacy. Multiple companies signal that compliance with evolving AI regulations and strict data privacy requirements may lead to increased operational costs and potential impacts on competitive positioning. Additionally, environmental considerations regarding climate change regulations are identified as a material risk for key constituents, suggesting a broader sector-wide exposure to tightening sustainability mandates that could alter financial conditions across the technology landscape.
The concentration of these risks within the fund's top holdings indicates a high degree of correlated downside potential should regulatory environments shift abruptly or enforcement intensify. With NVIDIA alone representing 9.0% of the portfolio and explicitly flagging AI regulation, climate compliance, and cybersecurity costs as material threats, the aggregate exposure to these systemic factors is substantial. When combined with similar disclosures from other major constituents like Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon regarding data privacy and operational scaling, the fund faces a scenario where regulatory headwinds could simultaneously depress earnings across its largest weights rather than affecting them in isolation. This clustering of specific compliance risks suggests that policy changes targeting AI ethics or digital infrastructure costs would likely resonate throughout the entire index component structure.
While systemic themes dominate these disclosures, NVIDIA's singular 9.0% weighting amplifies the impact of any material adverse outcomes related to its specific risk factors. If regulatory bodies impose stringent new mandates on responsible AI use or climate reporting that disproportionately affect semiconductor manufacturing and data center operations, this single holding could drive a disproportionate decline in the fund's overall performance relative to smaller positions. The explicit mention of competitive position erosion alongside cost increases for NVIDIA further underscores how company-specific vulnerabilities tied to macro-regulatory shifts can translate into significant portfolio-level volatility without requiring changes across all holdings.
Synthesized from constituent 10-K risk factor disclosures. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-23 03:02:39.791837+00
🏢 Sector Analysis
AI GeneratedThe Invesco QQQ Trust exhibits a pronounced exposure to the technology sector, which accounts for nearly half of its total portfolio weight. This heavy allocation is further reinforced by significant positions in communication services and consumer cyclicals, creating an investment thesis that heavily favors innovation-driven growth and digital infrastructure over traditional stable industries. The top five holdings alone represent almost 33% of the fund's assets, with three major technology names dominating this group alongside key players from e-commerce and automotive sectors. Such a structure indicates a deliberate tilt toward companies expected to benefit from long-term secular trends like artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and consumer spending shifts in discretionary categories.
This concentration strategy introduces substantial idiosyncratic risk tied specifically to the performance of mega-cap technology firms rather than broad market movements. With nearly 50% of assets concentrated within just ten positions, the fund's volatility profile is likely more sensitive to earnings misses or regulatory developments affecting these specific giants compared to a more diversified equity vehicle. The near absence of financial services and real estate sectors suggests an intentional avoidance of interest-rate-sensitive industries that often lag during periods of aggressive monetary tightening. Consequently, while this allocation offers high potential for capital appreciation in bull markets driven by tech innovation, it also means the fund may underperform significantly if growth valuations contract or if regulatory headwinds target large-cap technology companies specifically.
AI-generated sector analysis from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-22 13:51:19.87095+00
Flow Driver Analysis
2-Step CircleWhich larger ETFs share QQQ's holdings — and mechanically drive its price through index rebalancing flows?
Approximately 100% of QQQ's weight flows through these larger ETFs
| Driver ETF | AUM | Expense | Shared Stocks | Weight Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACWIiShares MSCI ACWI ETF | $28B | — | 95 | 96.8% |
| URTHiShares MSCI World ETF | $7B | — | 94 | 96.4% |
| RSPRSP | $83B | — | 87 | 95.3% |
| SCHXSCHX | $61B | — | 90 | 94.6% |
| ITOTiShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF | $80B | — | 90 | 94.6% |
97% of QQQ's portfolio by weight is also held by ACWI. When ACWI receives inflows, it mechanically buys these shared stocks — dragging QQQ's NAV along regardless of any thematic or sector catalyst. Combined, the top 5 overlapping ETFs control exposure to 100% ofQQQ's weight.
Overlap computed from constituent-level holdings data across 5 ETFs. Price co-movement with driver ETFs is structural, not coincidental. Not investment advice.
ETF Look-Through Dashboard
Peer through the ETF wrapper to see exactly what you own. Every metric is computed from constituent-level data.
Weighted metrics calculated based on 91% of fund assets with available data.
Herfindahl-Hirschman Concentration Index
Morningstar-Style Box
Sector & Cap Explorer
ETF Fundamental Radar
Operational health is mixed, with the bulk of weight in the mid-range (4–6) Piotroski scores.
Piotroski F-Score (Operational Health)
Score 0-9: Measures Profitability, Leverage, and Efficiency
Based on 94% of fund weight with Piotroski data.
Computed by rolling up individual stock Piotroski F-Scores, Altman Z-Scores, and Beneish M-Scores weighted by each constituent's allocation.
Dividend Safety True-Up
DeterministicThe dividend-paying companies inside QQQ collectively pay out 30% of their Free Cash Flow to maintain the current yield. This leaves a substantial cash buffer, making dividend cuts unlikely even in a downturn. Based on 67% of fund weight in dividend-paying stocks.
FCF Payout Ratio = Dividends Paid / Free Cash Flow, weighted by constituent allocation. Not investment advice.
Earnings vs. Price Decomposition
ProprietaryQQQ is up 34.9% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is +36.2%. Price performance is closely aligned with fundamental earnings growth — valuations are roughly unchanged.
Earnings growth = weighted average YoY EPS growth of all constituents (capped at ±500% to limit outlier distortion). Based on 89% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Value Creation Map
ROIC vs WACCWhat percentage of QQQ's weight is allocated to companies that create economic value (ROIC > WACC) vs. destroy it?
Of QQQ's analyzed weight, 75% is invested in companies earning more than their cost of capital — genuine value creators. The remaining 25% consists of companies whose ROIC falls below their WACC, effectively destroying shareholder value with every dollar invested.
ROIC-WACC spread for 91% of fund weight with available data. Not investment advice.
Concentration Risk Monitor
ELEVATEDQQQ's top holding NVDA at 8.7% is above the 8% elevated-concentration threshold. The effective number of stocks is 32 vs. the actual count of 50.
Effective # of Stocks = 1 / HHI (Herfindahl-Hirschman Index). Variance share approximated as w² / Σw². Not investment advice.
Passive Crowding Score
MODERATEHow much of each constituent's market cap is structurally locked in passive ETFs — a proxy for liquidity fragility during sell-offs.
QQQ has a Passive Crowding Score of 40/100. On average, 11.9% of the market capitalization of QQQ's underlying holdings is structurally locked in passive ETF vehicles. This indicates moderate passive ownership density. Index rebalances and ETF creation/redemption activity can amplify short-term volatility in the underlying holdings.
Passive $ = Σ(ETF AUM × holding weight) across all 51 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds). Not investment advice.
Under the Hood — Top 15 Constituents
| # | Ticker | Company | Weight | P/E | F-Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA | NVIDIA Corp. Technology | 8.68% | 31.5x | 4/9 |
| 2 | AAPL | Apple Inc. Technology | 7.63% | 37.2x | 8/9 |
| 3 | MSFT | Microsoft Corp. Technology | 5.63% | 24.8x | 5/9 |
| 4 | AMZN | Amazon.com, Inc. Consumer Cyclical | 4.58% | 31.7x | 6/9 |
| 5 | TSLA | Tesla, Inc. Consumer Cyclical | 3.80% | 358.7x | 5/9 |
| 6 | META | Meta Platforms, Inc. Communication Services | 3.46% | 21.5x | 5/9 |
| 7 | WMT | Walmart Inc. Consumer Defensive | 3.43% | 41.9x | 7/9 |
| 8 | GOOGL | Alphabet Inc. Communication Services | 3.43% | 28.1x | 6/9 |
| 9 | GOOG | Alphabet Inc. Communication Services | 3.20% | 27.9x | 6/9 |
| 10 | AVGO | Broadcom Inc. Technology | 3.01% | 64.1x | 8/9 |
| 11 | COST | Costco Wholesale Corp. Consumer Defensive | 2.50% | 48.8x | 6/9 |
| 12 | NFLX | Netflix, Inc. Communication Services | 2.30% | 26.5x | 6/9 |
| 13 | MU | Micron Technology, Inc. Technology | 2.15% | 40.8x | 7/9 |
| 14 | PLTR | Palantir Technologies Inc. Technology | 1.90% | 152.3x | 8/9 |
| 15 | AMD | Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Technology | 1.88% | 156.5x | 7/9 |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how QQQ’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-06-12
15 holdings · 57.6% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA | 8.68% | 185,426,246 | $32.3B |
| 2 | AAPL | 7.63% | 112,027,518 | $28.4B |
| 3 | MSFT | 5.63% | 56,662,808 | $21.0B |
| 4 | AMZN | 4.58% | 81,915,069 | $17.1B |
| 5 | TSLA | 3.80% | 38,085,568 | $14.2B |
| 6 | META | 3.46% | 22,505,761 | $12.9B |
| 7 | WMT | 3.43% | 102,954,591 | $12.8B |
| 8 | GOOGL | 3.43% | 44,426,017 | $12.8B |
| 9 | GOOG | 3.20% | 41,495,816 | $11.9B |
| 10 | AVGO | 3.01% | 36,179,296 | $11.2B |
| 11 | COST | 2.50% | 9,350,542 | $9.3B |
| 12 | NFLX | 2.30% | 88,944,131 | $8.6B |
| 13 | MU | 2.15% | 23,709,978 | $8.0B |
| 14 | PLTR | 1.90% | 48,272,196 | $7.1B |
| 15 | AMD | 1.88% | 34,346,270 | $7.0B |
2026-05-24
15 holdings · 59.1% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA | 9.03% | 197,497,993 | $36.8B |
| 2 | AAPL | 8.01% | 120,094,732 | $32.6B |
| 3 | MSFT | 7.17% | 60,406,608 | $29.2B |
| 4 | AMZN | 4.92% | 86,884,628 | $20.1B |
| 5 | TSLA | 3.97% | 35,953,256 | $16.2B |
| 6 | META | 3.86% | 23,869,121 | $15.8B |
| 7 | GOOGL | 3.63% | 47,285,687 | $14.8B |
| 8 | GOOG | 3.38% | 43,945,321 | $13.8B |
| 9 | AVGO | 3.26% | 38,381,015 | $13.3B |
| 10 | PLTR | 2.23% | 51,254,736 | $9.1B |
| 11 | NFLX | 2.19% | 95,074,885 | $8.9B |
| 12 | COST | 2.10% | 9,943,818 | $8.6B |
| 13 | AMD | 1.92% | 36,529,154 | $7.8B |
| 14 | MU | 1.77% | 25,249,952 | $7.2B |
| 15 | CSCO | 1.68% | 88,652,574 | $6.8B |
2026-05-23
15 holdings · 59.1% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA | 9.03% | 197,497,993 | $36.8B |
| 2 | AAPL | 8.01% | 120,094,732 | $32.6B |
| 3 | MSFT | 7.17% | 60,406,608 | $29.2B |
| 4 | AMZN | 4.92% | 86,884,628 | $20.1B |
| 5 | TSLA | 3.97% | 35,953,256 | $16.2B |
| 6 | META | 3.86% | 23,869,121 | $15.8B |
| 7 | GOOGL | 3.63% | 47,285,687 | $14.8B |
| 8 | GOOG | 3.38% | 43,945,321 | $13.8B |
| 9 | AVGO | 3.26% | 38,381,015 | $13.3B |
| 10 | PLTR | 2.23% | 51,254,736 | $9.1B |
| 11 | NFLX | 2.19% | 95,074,885 | $8.9B |
| 12 | COST | 2.10% | 9,943,818 | $8.6B |
| 13 | AMD | 1.92% | 36,529,154 | $7.8B |
| 14 | MU | 1.77% | 25,249,952 | $7.2B |
| 15 | CSCO | 1.68% | 88,652,574 | $6.8B |
2026-05-22
15 holdings · 59.1% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA | 9.03% | 197,497,993 | $36.8B |
| 2 | AAPL | 8.01% | 120,094,732 | $32.6B |
| 3 | MSFT | 7.17% | 60,406,608 | $29.2B |
| 4 | AMZN | 4.92% | 86,884,628 | $20.1B |
| 5 | TSLA | 3.97% | 35,953,256 | $16.2B |
| 6 | META | 3.86% | 23,869,121 | $15.8B |
| 7 | GOOGL | 3.63% | 47,285,687 | $14.8B |
| 8 | GOOG | 3.38% | 43,945,321 | $13.8B |
| 9 | AVGO | 3.26% | 38,381,015 | $13.3B |
| 10 | PLTR | 2.23% | 51,254,736 | $9.1B |
| 11 | NFLX | 2.19% | 95,074,885 | $8.9B |
| 12 | COST | 2.10% | 9,943,818 | $8.6B |
| 13 | AMD | 1.92% | 36,529,154 | $7.8B |
| 14 | MU | 1.77% | 25,249,952 | $7.2B |
| 15 | CSCO | 1.68% | 88,652,574 | $6.8B |
2026-05-21
15 holdings · 59.1% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA | 9.03% | 197,497,993 | $36.8B |
| 2 | AAPL | 8.01% | 120,094,732 | $32.6B |
| 3 | MSFT | 7.17% | 60,406,608 | $29.2B |
| 4 | AMZN | 4.92% | 86,884,628 | $20.1B |
| 5 | TSLA | 3.97% | 35,953,256 | $16.2B |
| 6 | META | 3.86% | 23,869,121 | $15.8B |
| 7 | GOOGL | 3.63% | 47,285,687 | $14.8B |
| 8 | GOOG | 3.38% | 43,945,321 | $13.8B |
| 9 | AVGO | 3.26% | 38,381,015 | $13.3B |
| 10 | PLTR | 2.23% | 51,254,736 | $9.1B |
| 11 | NFLX | 2.19% | 95,074,885 | $8.9B |
| 12 | COST | 2.10% | 9,943,818 | $8.6B |
| 13 | AMD | 1.92% | 36,529,154 | $7.8B |
| 14 | MU | 1.77% | 25,249,952 | $7.2B |
| 15 | CSCO | 1.68% | 88,652,574 | $6.8B |
2026-05-20
15 holdings · 59.1% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA | 9.03% | 197,497,993 | $36.8B |
| 2 | AAPL | 8.01% | 120,094,732 | $32.6B |
| 3 | MSFT | 7.17% | 60,406,608 | $29.2B |
| 4 | AMZN | 4.92% | 86,884,628 | $20.1B |
| 5 | TSLA | 3.97% | 35,953,256 | $16.2B |
| 6 | META | 3.86% | 23,869,121 | $15.8B |
| 7 | GOOGL | 3.63% | 47,285,687 | $14.8B |
| 8 | GOOG | 3.38% | 43,945,321 | $13.8B |
| 9 | AVGO | 3.26% | 38,381,015 | $13.3B |
| 10 | PLTR | 2.23% | 51,254,736 | $9.1B |
| 11 | NFLX | 2.19% | 95,074,885 | $8.9B |
| 12 | COST | 2.10% | 9,943,818 | $8.6B |
| 13 | AMD | 1.92% | 36,529,154 | $7.8B |
| 14 | MU | 1.77% | 25,249,952 | $7.2B |
| 15 | CSCO | 1.68% | 88,652,574 | $6.8B |
Source: SEC filings and fund provider disclosures. Shows last 6 snapshot dates, top 15 holdings per date by weight.
Risk Profile
Sharpe = risk-adjusted return (higher is better). Computed from 1,200+ trading days with 5% risk-free rate.
Fama-French 5-Factor Exposure
Academic factor model decomposition — what's really driving this ETF's returns.
Fama-French 5-Factor Model. Data: Kenneth French Data Library. Regression over 3 years of daily returns.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
What Drove QQQ Today?
Daily return attribution — which holdings contributed most (and least) to the fund's move.
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe QQQ ETF is trading below its 50-day moving average but above the 200-day moving average, suggesting a potential consolidation phase within an ongoing upward trend. With an RSI of 43.9, the security appears to be in a relatively neutral position, neither overbought nor oversold, indicating balanced near-term momentum.
Underwater (Drawdown from Peak)
How far below the all-time high the price has been over time. Deeper = more pain for holders.
Rolling 60-Day Beta vs S&P 500 (VOO)
How the ETF's sensitivity to market moves changes over time. β > 1 = more volatile than the market.
Yield & Income
Smart Money Flow
Institutional 13F filings from top hedge funds. Positions updated quarterly from SEC EDGAR.
| Fund | Quarter | Shares Δ | % Change | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Millennium | 2026-Q1 | -2,673,000 | -30.6% | Decreased |
| Point72 | 2026-Q1 | -1,012,200 | -46.2% | Decreased |
| DE Shaw | 2026-Q1 | +750,000 | +100.0% | New Position |
| Citadel | 2026-Q1 | -617,700 | -1.7% | Decreased |
| Two Sigma | 2026-Q1 | +35,400 | +411.6% | Increased |
| Citadel | 2025-Q4 | -8,060,600 | -18.2% | Decreased |
| Millennium | 2025-Q4 | +1,542,200 | +21.5% | Increased |
| Point72 | 2025-Q4 | +576,300 | +35.7% | Increased |
| Two Sigma | 2025-Q4 | -271,100 | -96.9% | Decreased |
| DE Shaw | 2025-Q4 | -240,000 | -100.0% | Exited |
Source: SEC 13F-HR filings. 13F data is delayed ~45 days after quarter end. Not investment advice.
Sector Drift Over Time
How QQQ’s sector allocation has shifted across snapshots. Use the slider to travel through time.
Active Conviction Tracker
Shares bought and sold between the latest two data snapshots — reveals what the fund manager is actually doing.
Positions Increased (7)
Positions Decreased (47)
AUM & Capital Flow Tracker
Estimated assets under management derived from SEC filings and daily price movements — tracks how the fund's value evolves over time.
Estimated AUM derived from the latest SEC N-PORT filing TNA ($372.68B) scaled by daily price changes. Filing snapshots update when new regulatory filings are published (quarterly for most funds, daily for ARK).
Compare QQQ to Peers
Pre-computed overlap analysis. Click to see side-by-side comparison with holdings-level detail.
⚠ Based on top 44 holdings only. Actual overlap may differ.
Explore More
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: 2026-06-11.
SecuritiesDB is for informational purposes only. Not investment advice.