IGV alternatives and similar ETFs

IGV alternatives at a glance#

Each fund below can stand in for IGV, closest first. “Related” funds make a different bet that often moves the same way.

Fees come from each fund company, checked on the dates shown on each fund’s page.

How IGV and its alternatives did over the same dates#

Each row measures the alternative and IGV on the days both traded, so neither gets a head start. Correlation shows how closely their daily moves matched over about the last five years. A value of 1 means they always moved together.

Prices through October 16, 2026. Figures use daily closing prices adjusted for splits, with dividends reinvested. They do not include taxes or the cost of buying and selling. Past results do not tell you what will happen next.

Each IGV alternative, compared#

QQEW: First Trust Nasdaq-100 Select Equal Weight ETF#

QQEW is a looser match. It holds the 100 biggest companies on the Nasdaq outside finance, many of them in technology, while IGV holds companies that make software.

It charges 0.55% a year, about $55 on $10,000, against $38 for IGV. It held 50 stocks, against 106 for IGV.

From May 2006 to October 2026, QQEW returned about 11.2% a year and IGV returned about 13.3% a year. Over about the last five years they moved together on most days (correlation 0.87).

Read the QQEW fund page for its returns by year and worst drop.

IYW: iShares U.S. Technology ETF#

IYW is a looser match. It holds US technology companies, such as makers of chips, software and computers, while IGV holds companies that make software.

It charges 0.37% a year, about $37 on $10,000, against $38 for IGV. It held 148 stocks, against 106 for IGV.

From July 2001 to October 2026, IYW returned about 12.6% a year and IGV returned about 9.8% a year. Over about the last five years they often moved together, but not always (correlation 0.83).

Read the IYW fund page for its returns by year and worst drop.

FTEC: Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF#

FTEC is a looser match. It holds US technology companies, such as makers of chips, software and computers, while IGV holds companies that make software.

It charges 0.084% a year, about $8.40 on $10,000, against $38 for IGV. It held 282 stocks, against 106 for IGV.

From October 2013 to October 2026, FTEC returned about 21.7% a year and IGV returned about 16.2% a year. Over about the last five years they often moved together, but not always (correlation 0.82).

Read the FTEC fund page for its returns by year and worst drop.

VGT: Vanguard Information Technology ETF#

VGT is a looser match. It holds US technology companies, such as makers of chips, software and computers, while IGV holds companies that make software.

It charges 0.09% a year, about $9 on $10,000, against $38 for IGV. It held 318 stocks, against 106 for IGV.

From January 2004 to October 2026, VGT returned about 14.8% a year and IGV returned about 12.3% a year. Over about the last five years they often moved together, but not always (correlation 0.82).

Read the VGT fund page for its returns by year and worst drop.

ONEQ: Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF#

ONEQ is a looser match. It holds the 100 biggest companies on the Nasdaq outside finance, many of them in technology, while IGV holds companies that make software.

It charges 0.21% a year, about $21 on $10,000, against $38 for IGV. It held 1,032 stocks, against 106 for IGV.

From October 2003 to October 2026, ONEQ returned about 13.2% a year and IGV returned about 12.7% a year. Over about the last five years they often moved together, but not always (correlation 0.82).

Read the ONEQ fund page for its returns by year and worst drop.

QQQM: Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF#

QQQM is a looser match. It holds the 100 biggest companies on the Nasdaq outside finance, many of them in technology, while IGV holds companies that make software.

It charges 0.15% a year, about $15 on $10,000, against $38 for IGV.

From October 2020 to October 2026, QQQM returned about 16.5% a year and IGV returned about 7.7% a year. Over about the last five years they often moved together, but not always (correlation 0.81).

Read the QQQM fund page for its returns by year and worst drop.

QQQ: Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1#

QQQ is a looser match. It holds the 100 biggest companies on the Nasdaq outside finance, many of them in technology, while IGV holds companies that make software.

It charges 0.18% a year, about $18 on $10,000, against $38 for IGV.

From July 2001 to October 2026, QQQ returned about 12.5% a year and IGV returned about 9.8% a year. Over about the last five years they often moved together, but not always (correlation 0.81).

Read the QQQ fund page for its returns by year and worst drop.

XLK: State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF#

XLK is a looser match. It holds US technology companies, such as makers of chips, software and computers, while IGV holds companies that make software.

It charges 0.08% a year, about $8 on $10,000, against $38 for IGV. It held 75 stocks, against 106 for IGV.

From July 2001 to October 2026, XLK returned about 12.2% a year and IGV returned about 9.8% a year. Over about the last five years they often moved together, but not always (correlation 0.80).

Read the XLK fund page for its returns by year and worst drop.

IGV versions from other fund companies#

Some people keep all their funds with one company. Here is the closest fund to IGV from each other company on this page:

• First Trust: QQEW, First Trust Nasdaq-100 Select Equal Weight ETF (related fund, 0.55% a year)
• Fidelity: FTEC, Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF (related fund, 0.084% a year)
• Vanguard: VGT, Vanguard Information Technology ETF (related fund, 0.09% a year)
• Invesco: QQQM, Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (related fund, 0.15% a year)
• SPDR (State Street): XLK, State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF (related fund, 0.08% a year)

Most brokers let you buy any ETF, whoever runs it. Mutual fund versions, such as a fund company’s index mutual fund, are not listed here.

How to choose between IGV and its alternatives#

• What it tracks. A fund on the same index holds the same stocks. A different index can mean different weights, more or fewer holdings, or a different mix.
• The fee. The difference is often small. On $10,000, IGV costs about $38 a year. XLK costs about $8.
• History. An older fund has been through more bad markets, so you can see how far it fell.
• What you already own. Two funds that move together add little variety. A fund with a low correlation behaves more on its own.

Swapping IGV to harvest a tax loss#

Some investors sell a fund at a loss to lower their taxes, then buy a similar fund so they stay invested. This is called tax-loss harvesting.

The IRS wash sale rule blocks the loss if you buy a “substantially identical” security within 30 days before or after the sale. The IRS has not said exactly when two funds count. Funds on the same index are more likely to. Funds on a different index, such as QQEW, IYW or FTEC, are less likely to.

Ask a tax professional before you rely on this. Read the IRS rules in Publication 550.

Test IGV and its alternatives in a backtest#

Tactfolio is a platform where you build rules-based investing strategies, backtest them on decades of real prices, share them, and run them automatically in your own Alpaca account. Open the builder, add IGV and QQEW, and see how each would have done on the same dates, or how a mix of both would have done.

The details#

Alternatives are picked from facts, not from returns. First come funds that track the same index as IGV. Then come funds that hold the same kind of stocks through another index. Last come funds from a close category that make a different bet. Leveraged funds are only listed as alternatives to other leveraged funds.

Within each group, the funds whose daily returns moved most like IGV over about the last five years come first. Returns and worst drops use Tactfolio’s stored daily prices, adjusted for splits, with dividends reinvested. Each alternative is measured with IGV only on days both traded. Read what a backtest simulates for more on these measures.