ANEW vs. QLC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ANEW (ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF) and QLC (FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ANEW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI Global Transformational Changes Index, while QLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ANEW returned 3.83%/yr vs 15.29%/yr for QLC. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ANEW charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for QLC.

Performance

ANEW vs. QLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF (ANEW) and FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ANEW achieves a 1.92% return, which is significantly lower than QLC's 11.39% return.

ANEW

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 4.91%
• YTD: 1.92%
• 6M: 0.88%
• 1Y: 6.05%
• 3Y*: 13.69%
• 5Y*: 3.83%
• 10Y*: —

QLC

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: 5.38%
• YTD: 11.39%
• 6M: 11.88%
• 1Y: 33.09%
• 3Y*: 25.39%
• 5Y*: 15.29%
• 10Y*: 14.83%

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

ANEW vs. QLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ANEW ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF	1.92%	12.01%	19.37%	22.81%	-29.62%	6.95%	5.77%
QLC FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund	11.39%	23.26%	26.71%	26.02%	-17.21%	28.46%	8.87%

Correlation

The correlation between ANEW and QLC is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 19, 2020	0.87

The correlation between ANEW and QLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

ANEW vs. QLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ANEW	QLC
Healthcare	23.3%	10.1%
Technology	22.6%	34.8%
Communication Services	16.0%	13.8%
Basic Materials	11.6%	2.2%
Consumer Cyclical	11.2%	7.9%
Industrials	7.0%	6.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	3.2%
Financial Services	3.6%	13.8%
Real Estate	0.2%	2.3%
Energy	-	2.0%
Utilities	-	3.4%

Return for Risk

ANEW vs. QLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

ANEW

ANEW Risk / Return Rank: 15
ANEW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
ANEW Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
ANEW Omega Ratio Rank: 15
ANEW Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
ANEW Martin Ratio Rank: 14

QLC

QLC Risk / Return Rank: 81
QLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
QLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QLC Omega Ratio Rank: 80
QLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
QLC Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

ANEW vs. QLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF (ANEW) and FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC). 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.

	ANEW	QLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.46	2.69	-2.23
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.73	3.71	-2.98
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.48	-0.39
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.38	3.76	-3.38
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.08	17.59	-16.51
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ANEW vs. QLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ANEW Sharpe Ratio is 0.46, which is lower than the QLC Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ANEW and QLC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ANEW	QLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46	2.69	-2.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.20	0.91	-0.71
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.81	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	0.80	-0.52

Drawdowns

ANEW vs. QLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ANEW drawdown since its inception was -39.87%, which is greater than QLC's maximum drawdown of -35.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ANEW and QLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	ANEW	QLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.87%	-35.86%	-4.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.12%	-8.84%	-7.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.26%	-18.49%	-1.77%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.87%	-23.81%	-16.06%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.05%	-0.74%	-2.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.37%	-4.54%	-8.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.62%	1.89%	+3.73%

Volatility

ANEW vs. QLC - Volatility Comparison

ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF (ANEW) has a higher volatility of 3.09% compared to FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) at 2.94%. This indicates that ANEW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ANEW	QLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.09%	2.94%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.83%	9.51%	+0.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.19%	12.38%	+0.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.81%	16.82%	+1.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.80%	18.42%	+0.38%

ANEW vs. QLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

ANEW has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than QLC's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

ANEW vs. QLC - Dividend Comparison

ANEW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, less than QLC's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ANEW ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF	0.61%	0.54%	1.08%	0.87%	1.05%	0.24%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLC FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund	0.88%	0.94%	1.03%	1.26%	1.46%	0.96%	1.40%	1.91%	1.82%	1.29%	1.80%	0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ANEW and QLC in my portfolio?

ANEW and QLC have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ANEW or QLC?

ANEW has higher volatility (3.09%) compared to QLC (2.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ANEW dropped -39.87% vs QLC's -35.86%.

Which ETF is better, ANEW or QLC?

On 5-year performance, QLC leads with 15.29% vs 3.83% for ANEW. On fees, QLC is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, QLC has been the lower-risk option at 2.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ANEW or QLC?

Over the 5-year period, QLC has performed better with a 15.29% return vs 3.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ANEW or QLC?

QLC is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for ANEW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ANEW or QLC?

QLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.61% for ANEW.

What is the main difference between ANEW and QLC?

ANEW is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. ANEW tracks MSCI Global Transformational Changes Index, while QLC tracks Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Northern Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for ANEW and 0.25% for QLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 0.46), 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.