LCTU vs. QQQ

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

LCTU (BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF) and QQQ (Invesco QQQ ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCTU is a ESG fund actively managed by BlackRock, while QQQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. LCTU is actively managed, while QQQ is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LCTU returned 12.73%/yr vs 18.43%/yr for QQQ. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LCTU charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for QQQ.

Performance

LCTU vs. QQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) and Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCTU achieves a 9.85% return, which is significantly lower than QQQ's 21.62% return.

LCTU

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 5.43%
• YTD: 9.85%
• 6M: 10.40%
• 1Y: 27.44%
• 3Y*: 21.47%
• 5Y*: 12.73%
• 10Y*: —

QQQ

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: 10.68%
• YTD: 21.62%
• 6M: 20.27%
• 1Y: 43.30%
• 3Y*: 28.89%
• 5Y*: 18.43%
• 10Y*: 21.97%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LCTU vs. QQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
LCTU BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF	9.85%	16.96%	24.00%	25.38%	-20.02%	17.49%
QQQ Invesco QQQ ETF	21.62%	20.77%	25.58%	54.86%	-32.58%	19.15%

Correlation

The correlation between LCTU and QQQ is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 9, 2021	0.93

The correlation between LCTU and QQQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

LCTU vs. QQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LCTU	QQQ
Technology	34.6%	53.8%
Financial Services	12.1%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.3%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.3%	12.3%
Healthcare	8.8%	4.2%
Industrials	8.7%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	7.7%
Energy	3.5%	0.6%
Real Estate	2.5%	0.1%
Utilities	2.5%	1.4%
Basic Materials	1.9%	1.1%

Return for Risk

LCTU vs. QQQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

LCTU

LCTU Risk / Return Rank: 65
LCTU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
LCTU Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
LCTU Omega Ratio Rank: 66
LCTU Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
LCTU Martin Ratio Rank: 70

QQQ

QQQ Risk / Return Rank: 77
QQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
QQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 77
QQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
QQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 74

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

LCTU vs. QQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) and Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	LCTU	QQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.25	2.73	-0.48
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.07	3.55	-0.48
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.47	-0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.96	3.71	-0.75
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.20	14.30	-1.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LCTU vs. QQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCTU Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is comparable to the QQQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCTU and QQQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LCTU	QQQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.25	2.73	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75	0.83	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.99	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	0.41	+0.36

Drawdowns

LCTU vs. QQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCTU drawdown since its inception was -25.93%, smaller than the maximum QQQ drawdown of -82.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCTU and QQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCTU	QQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.93%	-82.97%	+57.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.38%	-11.96%	+2.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.83%	-22.77%	+2.94%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.93%	-35.12%	+9.19%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.32%	-32.79%	+26.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.10%	3.11%	-1.01%

Volatility

LCTU vs. QQQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) is 2.98%, while Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ) has a volatility of 4.48%. This indicates that LCTU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCTU	QQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.98%	4.48%	-1.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.34%	12.11%	-2.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.28%	15.95%	-3.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.15%	22.39%	-5.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.02%	22.30%	-5.28%

LCTU vs. QQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCTU has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQ's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

LCTU vs. QQQ - Dividend Comparison

LCTU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, more than QQQ's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LCTU BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF	0.92%	1.02%	1.27%	1.46%	1.63%	2.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQ Invesco QQQ ETF	0.38%	0.45%	0.56%	0.62%	0.80%	0.43%	0.55%	0.74%	0.91%	0.84%	1.06%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCTU and QQQ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, LCTU and QQQ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, LCTU or QQQ?

QQQ has higher volatility (4.48%) compared to LCTU (2.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCTU dropped -25.93% vs QQQ's -82.97%.

Which ETF is better, LCTU or QQQ?

On 5-year performance, QQQ leads with 18.43% vs 12.73% for LCTU. On fees, LCTU is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, LCTU has been the lower-risk option at 2.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCTU or QQQ?

Over the 5-year period, QQQ has performed better with a 18.43% return vs 12.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCTU or QQQ?

LCTU is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for QQQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LCTU or QQQ?

LCTU has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.38% for QQQ.

What is the main difference between LCTU and QQQ?

LCTU is categorized as ESG, while QQQ is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: BlackRock and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LCTU and 0.18% for QQQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 2.25), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.