PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACMDX vs. QDSNX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACMDX vs. QDSNX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Absolute Capital Defender Fund (ACMDX) and AQR Diversifying Strategies Fund Class N (QDSNX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACMDX achieves a 5.76% return, which is significantly lower than QDSNX's 6.30% return.


ACMDX

1D
0.17%
1M
2.94%
YTD
5.76%
6M
5.86%
1Y
13.51%
3Y*
9.71%
5Y*
3.96%
10Y*
4.60%

QDSNX

1D
0.07%
1M
1.50%
YTD
6.30%
6M
7.81%
1Y
14.76%
3Y*
13.72%
5Y*
10.95%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACMDX vs. QDSNX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
ACMDX
Absolute Capital Defender Fund
5.76%8.56%9.61%8.51%-15.26%12.00%9.66%
QDSNX
AQR Diversifying Strategies Fund Class N
6.30%16.14%9.56%8.62%14.48%10.35%5.40%

Correlation

The correlation between ACMDX and QDSNX is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.37

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.31

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2020

0.21

The correlation between ACMDX and QDSNX shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (5 years) to 0.37 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ACMDX vs. QDSNX — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACMDX
ACMDX Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
ACMDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACMDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACMDX Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
ACMDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACMDX Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

QDSNX
QDSNX Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
QDSNX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDSNX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDSNX Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
QDSNX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDSNX Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ACMDX vs. QDSNX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Absolute Capital Defender Fund (ACMDX) and AQR Diversifying Strategies Fund Class N (QDSNX). 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.


ACMDXQDSNXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.04

3.02

-0.98

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.96

4.54

-1.58

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.59

-0.22

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.00

7.63

-4.62

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.11

22.05

-9.94

ACMDX vs. QDSNX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACMDX Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is lower than the QDSNX Sharpe Ratio of 3.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACMDX and QDSNX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ACMDXQDSNXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.04

3.02

-0.98

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

1.44

-0.98

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

1.63

-1.17

Drawdowns

ACMDX vs. QDSNX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACMDX drawdown since its inception was -17.63%, which is greater than QDSNX's maximum drawdown of -7.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACMDX and QDSNX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACMDXQDSNXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.63%

-7.15%

-10.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.63%

-1.97%

-2.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.50%

-6.93%

-4.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.63%

-7.15%

-10.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-17.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.18%

-1.46%

-3.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.15%

0.68%

+0.47%

Volatility

ACMDX vs. QDSNX - Volatility Comparison

Absolute Capital Defender Fund (ACMDX) has a higher volatility of 1.63% compared to AQR Diversifying Strategies Fund Class N (QDSNX) at 1.38%. This indicates that ACMDX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QDSNX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACMDXQDSNXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.63%

1.38%

+0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.69%

3.57%

+1.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.81%

4.99%

+1.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.61%

7.63%

+0.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.82%

7.31%

+1.51%

ACMDX vs. QDSNX - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACMDX has a 2.70% expense ratio, which is lower than QDSNX's 3.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACMDX vs. QDSNX - Dividend Comparison

ACMDX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.12%, more than QDSNX's 1.87% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
ACMDX
Absolute Capital Defender Fund
3.12%3.30%3.54%0.00%0.00%9.49%0.00%0.00%6.87%2.67%0.67%
QDSNX
AQR Diversifying Strategies Fund Class N
1.87%1.99%0.00%11.18%8.01%5.99%1.83%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACMDX and QDSNX have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ACMDX has higher volatility (1.63%) compared to QDSNX (1.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACMDX dropped -17.63% vs QDSNX's -7.15%.

QDSNX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.02 vs 2.04), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACMDX and QDSNX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer