DECT vs. MSTQ
DECT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Dec ETF) and MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DECT returned 14.52%/yr vs 24.11%/yr for MSTQ. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DECT charges 0.74%/yr vs 1.59%/yr for MSTQ.
Performance
DECT vs. MSTQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DECT achieves a 7.16% return, which is significantly lower than MSTQ's 17.40% return.
DECT
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- 3.06%
- YTD
- 7.16%
- 6M
- 7.61%
- 1Y
- 21.15%
- 3Y*
- 14.52%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MSTQ
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 9.02%
- YTD
- 17.40%
- 6M
- 15.69%
- 1Y
- 31.81%
- 3Y*
- 24.11%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DECT vs. MSTQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DECT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Dec ETF | 7.16% | 15.04% | 11.86% | 19.35% | -4.33% |
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF | 17.40% | 20.57% | 19.58% | 43.10% | -9.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between DECT and MSTQ 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 | 0.83 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 2, 2022 | 0.83 |
The correlation between DECT and MSTQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
DECT vs. MSTQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
DECT
MSTQ
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
DECT
MSTQ
Financial Services
DECT
MSTQ
Communication Services
DECT
MSTQ
Consumer Cyclical
DECT
MSTQ
Healthcare
DECT
MSTQ
Industrials
DECT
MSTQ
Consumer Defensive
DECT
MSTQ
Energy
DECT
MSTQ
Utilities
DECT
MSTQ
Real Estate
DECT
MSTQ
Basic Materials
DECT
MSTQ
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
DECT vs. MSTQ — Risk / Return Rank
DECT
MSTQ
DECT vs. MSTQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Dec ETF (DECT) and LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). 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.
| DECT | MSTQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.39 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.48 | 2.58 | +0.90 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.66 | 8.04 | +8.62 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| DECT | MSTQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.45 | 2.23 | +0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.36 | 0.87 | +0.49 |
Drawdowns
DECT vs. MSTQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DECT drawdown since its inception was -13.26%, smaller than the maximum MSTQ drawdown of -31.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DECT and MSTQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DECT | MSTQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.26% | -31.05% | +17.79% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.11% | -12.39% | +6.28% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.26% | -15.22% | +1.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.28% | -0.21% | -0.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.42% | -8.62% | +7.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.27% | 3.97% | -2.70% |
Volatility
DECT vs. MSTQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Dec ETF (DECT) is 1.65%, while LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) has a volatility of 4.25%. This indicates that DECT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DECT | MSTQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.65% | 4.25% | -2.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.34% | 10.58% | -4.24% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.68% | 14.35% | -5.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.23% | 18.85% | -8.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.23% | 18.85% | -8.62% |
DECT vs. MSTQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
DECT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTQ's 1.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
DECT vs. MSTQ - Dividend Comparison
DECT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MSTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.90%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
DECT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Dec ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.43% | 0.00% |
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF | 11.90% | 13.97% | 3.72% | 0.77% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DECT and MSTQ 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.
MSTQ has higher volatility (4.25%) compared to DECT (1.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DECT dropped -13.26% vs MSTQ's -31.05%.
On 3-year performance, MSTQ leads with 24.11% vs 14.52% for DECT. On fees, DECT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, DECT has been the lower-risk option at 1.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MSTQ has performed better with a 24.11% return vs 14.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DECT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.
MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 11.90%, compared with 0.00% for DECT.
They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Little Harbor Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for DECT and 1.59% for MSTQ.
DECT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 2.23), 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.
Find the right allocation for DECT and MSTQ
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