ARKK vs ARKQ: Which ETF Is Better in 2026?
A metric-by-metric comparison of ARK Innovation ETF (ARKK) and ARK Autonomous Technology & Robotics ETF (ARKQ) — both Thematic funds — using ETFValuer's daily-updated rankings.
Educational content — not financial advice. Data as of July 29, 2026. ~5 minute read.
The Verdict
ARKK and ARKQ compete directly — both are Thematic funds chasing the same job in a portfolio. That makes this a genuine either/or: the index each tracks, what it costs, and how it has handled drawdowns are what separate them, not the broad exposure they give you.
On ETFValuer's overall model — which blends return, risk-adjusted performance, cost, drawdown, size and volatility — ARKQ scores higher: 45.9 (Grade D) versus 35.1 for ARKK. That doesn't make ARKK a bad fund; it means ARKQ currently edges it out on this specific mix of factors. Read the metric-by-metric breakdown below before deciding which matters more for your own portfolio.
Head-to-Head: Every Metric
| ARKK | ARKQ | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Thematic | Thematic |
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.75% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $6.5B | $2.2B |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.23% |
| 1-year return | -5.65% | +15.65% |
| 3-year return | +56.47% | +100.81% |
| Volatility | 36.64% | 34.35% |
| Max drawdown | -39.56% | -30.76% |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.29 | 0.31 |
| ETFValuer score | 35.1 | 45.9 |
| Grade | D | D |
| Overall rank | #436 | #399 |
Bold marks the better value in each row. "Better" is directional only (e.g. lower cost, higher return) — it isn't a recommendation by itself. See the full methodology.
Cost
On cost, the two are essentially tied — ARKK charges 0.75% a year versus ARKQ's 0.75%. A difference this small (about $0.00 a year on a $10,000 position) isn't a reason to choose one fund over the other.
What ARKK's Fees Cost You
ARKK charges an expense ratio of 0.75% a year, deducted automatically from the fund's value. Small percentages compound into real money — adjust the figures below to see the impact on your own numbers.
Assumes a constant gross return and no additional contributions — a simplification, but it isolates exactly what the expense ratio costs. Try the full fee calculator to model contributions and compare any two funds.
Performance & Risk
Over the trailing 3 years, ARKQ returned +100.81% versus +56.47% for ARKK — a gap of about 44.3 percentage points. On risk, ARKQ has held up better historically, with a shallower max drawdown (-30.76% vs. -39.56%). ARKQ currently has the better risk-adjusted return (Sharpe ratio of 0.31 vs. -0.29), meaning it delivered more return per unit of volatility taken on.
How Closely Do They Track Each Other?
Over the last 3.0 years of daily returns (750 shared trading days), ARKK and ARKQ show a strong correlation of 0.872 — clearly related, with room to diverge. There is some genuine differentiation here, but not enough to call these complementary holdings. Pairing them mostly concentrates risk rather than spreading it.
| Measure | Value | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Daily return correlation | 0.872 | Strong — clearly related, with room to diverge |
| R-squared | 76.0% | 76.0% of ARKK's daily moves are explained by ARKQ's |
| Tracking error (annualised) | 19.49% | Typical yearly spread between the two funds' returns |
| Annualised return over 3.0y | ARKK +13.24% · ARKQ +24.79% | ARKQ ahead by 11.55 points a year |
Correlation alone understates how far these can drift. Across every rolling 12-month window in the period, ARKK finished as much as +7.6 points ahead of ARKQ at the best extreme and -45.5 points at the worst — a 53.1-point spread between the best and worst year of relative performance. Two funds can correlate tightly day to day and still deliver very different outcomes over any single year you happen to hold them.
Calculated from daily total returns over the trailing 3-year window, recomputed every day this site refreshes. Correlation of 1.00 means the two funds moved in lockstep; 0.00 means their daily moves were unrelated.
Holdings Overlap
ARKK and ARKQ hold 3 of the same companies among their top 10 positions. Those shared names make up 18.1% of ARKK and 20.0% of ARKQ. That's modest duplication — the funds are mostly distinct at the top, so holding both can still add diversification.
| Shared Holding | ARKK Weight | ARKQ Weight |
|---|---|---|
| TESLA INC | 9.74% | 9.86% |
| ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC | 5.18% | 6.34% |
| PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES INC | 3.13% | 3.81% |
Compares the top 10 reported holdings from each fund's most recent SEC N-PORT-P filing, so it understates total overlap — funds tracking similar indexes overlap far more deeply than the top 10 alone can show. Search any company across all tracked funds with the Stock Overlap tool.
Which One Should You Pick?
Lean ARKK if…
- You have no strong preference — ARKK is a perfectly reasonable default here
Lean ARKQ if…
- Current income matters to you — it yields 0.23% against 0.00%
- You care about return per unit of risk — its Sharpe ratio of 0.31 beats -0.29
- You weight recent results heavily — it returned 100.8% over 3 years against 56.5%
Whichever you pick, holding both at full weight is usually the wrong answer — see the overlap and correlation sections above.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is ARKK or ARKQ better?
On ETFValuer's overall model — which blends return, risk-adjusted performance, cost, drawdown, size and volatility — ARKQ scores higher: 45.9 (Grade D) versus 35.1 for ARKK. That doesn't make ARKK a bad fund; it means ARKQ currently edges it out on this specific mix of factors. Read the metric-by-metric breakdown below before deciding which matters more for your own portfolio.
Which has the lower expense ratio, ARKK or ARKQ?
ARKQ currently has the lower expense ratio (0.75% vs. 0.75%).
Can I hold both ARKK and ARKQ?
You can, though the benefit is limited. At a correlation of 0.87, ARKK and ARKQ fall together far more often than not, so owning both adds complexity and a second expense ratio without much real diversification. Most investors are better served picking one.
Go deeper on either fund
Full daily-updated metrics, holdings context, and category peers.