AMOM vs. QRFT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AMOM (QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF) and QRFT (QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts, while QRFT is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, AMOM returned 11.70%/yr vs 10.89%/yr for QRFT. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

AMOM vs. QRFT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF (AMOM) and QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMOM achieves a 26.78% return, which is significantly higher than QRFT's 9.72% return.

AMOM

• 1D: -4.33%
• 1M: 5.97%
• YTD: 26.78%
• 6M: 24.27%
• 1Y: 40.35%
• 3Y*: 26.54%
• 5Y*: 11.70%
• 10Y*: —

QRFT

• 1D: -1.86%
• 1M: -1.09%
• YTD: 9.72%
• 6M: 8.61%
• 1Y: 24.67%
• 3Y*: 20.50%
• 5Y*: 10.89%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMOM vs. QRFT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AMOM QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF	26.78%	7.69%	35.79%	27.06%	-26.29%	13.08%	53.81%	9.64%
QRFT QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF	9.72%	17.95%	21.36%	24.16%	-22.69%	22.74%	40.05%	15.22%

Correlation

The correlation between AMOM and QRFT 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	0.85
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2019	0.84

The correlation between AMOM and QRFT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

AMOM vs. QRFT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AMOM	QRFT
Technology	50.2%	38.7%
Industrials	21.9%	8.4%
Energy	11.8%	4.3%
Healthcare	7.7%	8.6%
Communication Services	7.4%	8.2%
Financial Services	6.2%	10.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	4.2%
Basic Materials	4.6%	1.7%
Consumer Cyclical	3.0%	12.1%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.6%
Utilities	1.1%	1.5%

Return for Risk

AMOM vs. QRFT — Risk / Return Rank

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

AMOM

AMOM Risk / Return Rank: 55
AMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
AMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
AMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 49
AMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
AMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 62

QRFT

QRFT Risk / Return Rank: 58
QRFT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
QRFT Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
QRFT Omega Ratio Rank: 54
QRFT Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
QRFT Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

AMOM vs. QRFT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF (AMOM) and QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AMOM	QRFT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.67	1.77	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.21	2.42	-0.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.32	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.09	2.72	+0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.70	11.53	-0.82

AMOM vs. QRFT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMOM Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is comparable to the QRFT Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMOM and QRFT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AMOM vs. QRFT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMOM drawdown since its inception was -39.68%, which is greater than QRFT's maximum drawdown of -30.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMOM and QRFT.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMOM	QRFT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.68%	-30.19%	-9.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.10%	-9.12%	-3.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.26%	-19.99%	-10.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.68%	-28.20%	-11.48%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.33%	-2.89%	-1.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.75%	-6.76%	-3.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.78%	2.15%	+1.63%

Volatility

AMOM vs. QRFT - Volatility Comparison

QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF (AMOM) has a higher volatility of 12.24% compared to QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT) at 5.79%. This indicates that AMOM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QRFT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AMOM	QRFT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.24%	5.79%	+6.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.66%	11.14%	+8.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.29%	14.00%	+10.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.26%	17.48%	+6.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.22%	20.13%	+5.09%

AMOM vs. QRFT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AMOM and QRFT have an expense ratio of 0.75%.

Dividends

AMOM vs. QRFT - Dividend Comparison

AMOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than QRFT's 0.26% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AMOM QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF	0.07%	0.09%	0.00%	0.47%	0.72%	0.74%	24.31%	5.51%
QRFT QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF	0.26%	0.27%	0.52%	0.77%	0.83%	0.05%	1.81%	4.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMOM and QRFT in my portfolio?

AMOM and QRFT 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.

Which is riskier, AMOM or QRFT?

AMOM has higher volatility (12.24%) compared to QRFT (5.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMOM dropped -39.68% vs QRFT's -30.19%.

Which ETF is better, AMOM or QRFT?

On 5-year performance, AMOM leads with 11.70% vs 10.89% for QRFT. Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. On volatility, QRFT has been the lower-risk option at 5.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AMOM or QRFT?

Over the 5-year period, AMOM has performed better with a 11.70% return vs 10.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMOM or QRFT?

AMOM and QRFT have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMOM or QRFT?

QRFT has the higher dividend yield at 0.26%, compared with 0.07% for AMOM.

What is the main difference between AMOM and QRFT?

AMOM is categorized as Momentum, while QRFT is Large Cap Growth Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QRFT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.67), 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.