Skip to Content
ETF Comparisons

XLK vs. SQQQ

Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund

XLK
$--
vs

ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ

SQQQ
$--

Correlation

-0.97

Compare with

Top 10 comparisons with XLK:
Compare:
XLK
Correlation
With:
SQQQ
ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ
-0.97
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 SQQQ:

There are no shared holdings.
Invest with XLK
Learn more about SQQQ
XLKTechnology Select Sector SPDR Fund
SQQQProShares UltraPro Short QQQ

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
SQQQ ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ
Inception date
Dec 16 1998
Feb 09 2010
Expense ratio
0.10%
0.95%
XLK has a lower expense ratio than SQQQ by 0.85%. This can indicate that it’s cheaper to invest in XLK than SQQQ.
Type
US Equities
US Equities
XLK targets investing in US Equities, while SQQQ targets investing in US Equities.
Fund owner
State Street (SPDR)
ProShares
XLK is managed by State Street (SPDR), while SQQQ is managed by ProShares.
Volume (1m avg. daily)
$989,437,675
$2,217,551,125
Both XLK and SQQQ are considered high-volume assets. They’re less likely to be affected by issues like slippage and failed orders on Composer than low-volume assets.
AUM
$47,537,945,579
$4,455,851,279
XLK has more assets under management than SQQQ by $43,082,094,300. Higher AUM can be associated with better liquidity and lower slippage in trading.
Associated index
S&P Technology Select Sector Index
Nasdaq 100 Index
XLK is based off of the S&P Technology Select Sector Index, while SQQQ is based off of the Nasdaq 100 Index
Inverse/Leveraged
No
Inverse (-3x)
XLK uses undefined, while SQQQ uses Inverse (-3x). 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 SQQQ 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 SQQQ may offer dividends. The frequency and yield of the dividend may not be the same.
Prospectus
View
View
Neither XLK nor SQQQ require a K1.
When ETFs are inversely correlated, they can be used in actively traded strategies (multiple trades per week) to take positions in opposing directions. For example, if you believe XLK is going to fall, it would make sense to invest in SQQQ, as based on historical data, when XLK decreases in value, SQQQ tends to increase in value.

Automated Strategies
Related toXLK

#BTD

Buy the Dips: Nasdaq 100

Category

Featured, Technology Focus

Risk Rating

Aggressive

Automated Strategies
Related toSQQQ

#SPYMIN

SPY minimum drawdown

Category

Community

Risk Rating

Aggressive

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.