CSUAX vs. GQFPX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CSUAX (Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A) and GQFPX (GQG Partners Global Quality Dividend Income Fund) are both Global Equities funds. Over the past 3 years, CSUAX returned 11.76%/yr vs 14.73%/yr for GQFPX. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSUAX charges 1.22%/yr vs 0.86%/yr for GQFPX.

Performance

CSUAX vs. GQFPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A (CSUAX) and GQG Partners Global Quality Dividend Income Fund (GQFPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSUAX achieves a 9.47% return, which is significantly higher than GQFPX's 8.80% return.

CSUAX

• 1D: 1.26%
• 1M: -2.22%
• YTD: 9.47%
• 6M: 8.83%
• 1Y: 16.20%
• 3Y*: 11.76%
• 5Y*: 6.74%
• 10Y*: 7.38%

GQFPX

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: -2.50%
• YTD: 8.80%
• 6M: 9.02%
• 1Y: 15.73%
• 3Y*: 14.73%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CSUAX vs. GQFPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CSUAX Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A	9.47%	14.30%	8.30%	2.09%	-5.20%	7.46%
GQFPX GQG Partners Global Quality Dividend Income Fund	8.80%	19.29%	4.81%	15.09%	-1.13%	5.03%

Correlation

The correlation between CSUAX and GQFPX is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021	0.70

The correlation between CSUAX and GQFPX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CSUAX vs. GQFPX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSUAX

CSUAX Risk / Return Rank: 40
CSUAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
CSUAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
CSUAX Omega Ratio Rank: 33
CSUAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
CSUAX Martin Ratio Rank: 44

GQFPX

GQFPX Risk / Return Rank: 39
GQFPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
GQFPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
GQFPX Omega Ratio Rank: 31
GQFPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
GQFPX Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

CSUAX vs. GQFPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A (CSUAX) and GQG Partners Global Quality Dividend Income Fund (GQFPX). 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.

	CSUAX	GQFPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	1.66	+0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.47	2.35	+0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.29	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	2.99	-0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.19	8.58	+0.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CSUAX vs. GQFPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSUAX Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is comparable to the GQFPX Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSUAX and GQFPX, 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

	CSUAX	GQFPX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.70	1.66	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.55	0.82	-0.27

Drawdowns

CSUAX vs. GQFPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSUAX drawdown since its inception was -52.20%, which is greater than GQFPX's maximum drawdown of -16.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSUAX and GQFPX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSUAX	GQFPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.20%	-16.95%	-35.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.99%	-5.24%	-0.75%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.95%	-10.57%	-4.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.45%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.05%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.39%	-3.93%	+0.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.44%	-3.00%	-5.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.79%	1.82%	-0.03%

Volatility

CSUAX vs. GQFPX - Volatility Comparison

Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A (CSUAX) and GQG Partners Global Quality Dividend Income Fund (GQFPX) have volatilities of 3.14% and 3.24%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CSUAX	GQFPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.14%	3.24%	-0.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.82%	7.63%	+0.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.68%	9.47%	+0.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.99%	12.82%	+0.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.92%	12.82%	+2.10%

CSUAX vs. GQFPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSUAX has a 1.22% expense ratio, which is higher than GQFPX's 0.86% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSUAX vs. GQFPX - Dividend Comparison

CSUAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.39%, more than GQFPX's 5.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSUAX Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A	7.39%	8.09%	2.23%	2.17%	3.55%	2.95%	1.30%	1.52%	2.08%	5.00%	2.04%	6.20%
GQFPX GQG Partners Global Quality Dividend Income Fund	5.87%	5.32%	3.71%	3.69%	5.18%	1.38%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSUAX and GQFPX in my portfolio?

CSUAX and GQFPX have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CSUAX or GQFPX?

GQFPX has higher volatility (3.24%) compared to CSUAX (3.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSUAX dropped -52.20% vs GQFPX's -16.95%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSUAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 1.66), 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.