PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACSI vs. QUS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACSI vs. QUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACSI achieves a 9.66% return, which is significantly higher than QUS's 6.67% return.


ACSI

1D
-0.92%
1M
5.55%
YTD
9.66%
6M
9.77%
1Y
18.71%
3Y*
18.51%
5Y*
9.12%
10Y*

QUS

1D
-0.43%
1M
2.68%
YTD
6.67%
6M
6.93%
1Y
17.65%
3Y*
17.53%
5Y*
11.08%
10Y*
13.67%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACSI vs. QUS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ACSI
American Customer Satisfaction ETF
9.66%10.70%22.51%21.06%-20.93%23.33%22.93%24.88%-4.97%15.77%
QUS
SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF
6.67%14.13%18.99%21.78%-14.15%26.72%12.40%32.45%-3.66%21.67%

Correlation

The correlation between ACSI and QUS is 0.85, 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

0.85

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

0.87

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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 2, 2016

0.85

The correlation between ACSI and QUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

ACSI vs. QUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACSI
QUS

Consumer Cyclical

24.2%
5.8%

Communication Services

15.4%
10.2%

Technology

12.5%
26.3%

Consumer Defensive

12.4%
9.2%

Financial Services

9.6%
14.6%

Healthcare

8.5%
13.4%

Industrials

7.3%
8.6%

Utilities

3.9%
3.6%

Energy

3.4%
4.6%

Basic Materials

-

2.3%

Real Estate

-

1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

ACSI
24.2%
QUS
5.8%

Communication Services

ACSI
15.4%
QUS
10.2%

Technology

ACSI
12.5%
QUS
26.3%

Consumer Defensive

ACSI
12.4%
QUS
9.2%

Financial Services

ACSI
9.6%
QUS
14.6%

Healthcare

ACSI
8.5%
QUS
13.4%

Industrials

ACSI
7.3%
QUS
8.6%

Utilities

ACSI
3.9%
QUS
3.6%

Energy

ACSI
3.4%
QUS
4.6%

Basic Materials

ACSI

-

QUS
2.3%

Real Estate

ACSI

-

QUS
1.4%

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

ACSI vs. QUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACSI
ACSI Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
ACSI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACSI Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACSI Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
ACSI Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACSI Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank

QUS
QUS Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
QUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
QUS Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
QUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
QUS Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
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.

ACSI vs. QUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). 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.


ACSIQUSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.35

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.42

2.59

-0.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.45

11.54

-2.08

ACSI vs. QUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACSI Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the QUS Sharpe Ratio of 1.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACSI and QUS, 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


ACSIQUSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.63

1.95

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

0.78

-0.23

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.75

0.77

-0.02

Drawdowns

ACSI vs. QUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACSI drawdown since its inception was -34.49%, roughly equal to the maximum QUS drawdown of -33.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACSI and QUS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACSIQUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.49%

-33.78%

-0.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.76%

-6.85%

-0.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.27%

-13.94%

-1.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.86%

-22.30%

-2.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.38%

-0.50%

-1.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.39%

-3.70%

-1.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.98%

1.53%

+0.45%

Volatility

ACSI vs. QUS - Volatility Comparison

American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) has a higher volatility of 4.16% compared to SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) at 1.78%. This indicates that ACSI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACSIQUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.16%

1.78%

+2.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.88%

6.66%

+2.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.56%

9.09%

+2.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.66%

14.33%

+2.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.43%

16.42%

+1.01%

ACSI vs. QUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACSI has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than QUS's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACSI vs. QUS - Dividend Comparison

ACSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%, less than QUS's 1.31% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACSI
American Customer Satisfaction ETF
0.83%0.91%0.69%1.01%0.81%0.31%0.82%1.64%1.59%1.20%0.18%0.00%
QUS
SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF
1.31%1.38%1.49%1.57%1.68%1.27%1.73%1.81%2.12%1.86%2.07%1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACSI and QUS have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ACSI has higher volatility (4.16%) compared to QUS (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACSI dropped -34.49% vs QUS's -33.78%.

On 5-year performance, QUS leads with 11.08% vs 9.12% for ACSI. On fees, QUS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QUS has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QUS has performed better with a 11.08% return vs 9.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QUS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for ACSI.

QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 0.83% for ACSI.

ACSI tracks American Customer Satisfaction Investable Index, while QUS tracks MSCI USA Factor Mix A-Series Capped (USD). They also come from different issuers: Exponential ETFs and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for ACSI and 0.15% for QUS.

QUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 1.63), 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 ACSI and QUS

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