QQQM vs CNDX overlap

Nearly: 96% of the money in QQQM and CNDX sits in the same companies at the same weights, as of October 1, 2026. The other 4.5% is weight differences, plus 5 names only in QQQM and 4 only in CNDX.

96% by weight, as of October 1, 2026: nearly the same fund. 97 companies appear in both funds; they make up 99% of QQQM and 99% of CNDX.

The largest shared positions are NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, MU and AMZN. Ranked by the smaller of the two weights, which is the part you would own twice.

Out of every $100 split evenly between them, about $96 (half in each fund) buys identical positions. The rest is exposure only one of the two funds gives you: 5 names only in QQQM, 4 only in CNDX. Half in each behaves like 32 equally weighted stocks, against 32 for QQQM alone and 31 for CNDX alone. Whether that duplication is a problem depends on the mix you want; this is a description, not advice.

Close to it: 96% of the money in CNDX and QQQM sits in the same companies at the same weights, as of October 1, 2026. CNDX is iShares Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF (ISIN IE00B53SZB19), an Irish-domiciled UCITS fund on the Nasdaq-100 index. European brokers generally don't sell US-listed ETFs such as QQQM to retail clients, because those funds publish no KID (the PRIIPs key information document); UCITS funds do.

Yes. CNDX also trades as CNX1 (London, GBP), SXRV (Xetra, EUR) and CSNDX (Borsa Italiana, EUR). Each is the same portfolio in another currency, on another exchange or paying its dividends out, so QQQM vs SXRV also overlaps 96%.

For every company held by both funds we take the smaller of its two weights and add them up. The weights come from the full holdings files Invesco and iShares publish, not a top-10 sample, and companies are matched by their ISIN so share classes stay apart. Sector overlap applies the same rule to the issuers' sector labels; "behaves like N equally weighted stocks" is one over the sum of the squared weights.