DVXC vs. MUSQ

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

DVXC (WEBs Communication Services XLC Defined Volatility ETF) and MUSQ (MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF) are both Communications Equities funds - DVXC tracks the Syntax Defined Volatility XLC Index while MUSQ tracks the MUSQ Global Music Industry Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, DVXC returned -5.14% vs -8.84% for MUSQ. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. DVXC charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.76%/yr for MUSQ.

Performance

DVXC vs. MUSQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WEBs Communication Services XLC Defined Volatility ETF (DVXC) and MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF (MUSQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DVXC achieves a -20.96% return, which is significantly lower than MUSQ's -12.75% return.

DVXC

• 1D: 1.99%
• 1M: -3.90%
• 6M: -23.46%
• YTD: -20.96%
• 1Y: -5.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -8.15%

MUSQ

• 1D: -4.84%
• 1M: -4.32%
• 6M: -11.21%
• YTD: -12.75%
• 1Y: -8.84%
• 3Y*: -0.43%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 0.00%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DVXC WEBs Communication Services XLC Defined Volatility ETF	$148.16	$1.77K	$1.90K
MUSQ MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF	$161.63K	$82.87K	$43.23K

DVXC vs. MUSQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DVXC WEBs Communication Services XLC Defined Volatility ETF	-20.96%	16.00%
MUSQ MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF	-12.75%	-2.22%

Correlation

The correlation between DVXC and MUSQ is 0.62, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2025	0.62

The correlation between DVXC and MUSQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DVXC vs. MUSQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

DVXC

DVXC Risk / Return Rank: 7
DVXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
DVXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
DVXC Omega Ratio Rank: 8
DVXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
DVXC Martin Ratio Rank: 7

MUSQ

MUSQ Risk / Return Rank: 5
MUSQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
MUSQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
MUSQ Omega Ratio Rank: 4
MUSQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
MUSQ Martin Ratio Rank: 5

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

DVXC vs. MUSQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WEBs Communication Services XLC Defined Volatility ETF (DVXC) and MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF (MUSQ). 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.

	DVXC	MUSQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.27	-0.59	+0.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.19	-0.72	+0.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	0.91	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.28	-0.46	+0.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.65	-0.94	+0.29

DVXC vs. MUSQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DVXC Sharpe Ratio is -0.27, which is higher than the MUSQ Sharpe Ratio of -0.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DVXC and MUSQ, 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

DVXC vs. MUSQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DVXC drawdown since its inception was -26.47%, which is greater than MUSQ's maximum drawdown of -23.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DVXC and MUSQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	DVXC	MUSQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.47%	-23.11%	-3.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.47%	-23.11%	-3.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.95%	-18.60%	-5.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.04%	-7.07%	-1.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.32%	11.39%	-0.07%

Volatility

DVXC vs. MUSQ - Volatility Comparison

WEBs Communication Services XLC Defined Volatility ETF (DVXC) has a higher volatility of 10.08% compared to MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF (MUSQ) at 6.64%. This indicates that DVXC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MUSQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DVXC	MUSQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.08%	6.64%	+3.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.25%	15.14%	+6.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.73%	18.14%	+9.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.59%	18.08%	+9.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.59%	18.08%	+9.51%

DVXC vs. MUSQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

DVXC has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than MUSQ's 0.76% expense ratio.

Dividends

DVXC vs. MUSQ - Dividend Comparison

DVXC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MUSQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.72%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
DVXC WEBs Communication Services XLC Defined Volatility ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MUSQ MUSQ Global Music Industry Index ETF	0.72%	0.63%	1.08%	0.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DVXC and MUSQ in my portfolio?

DVXC and MUSQ have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DVXC or MUSQ?

DVXC has higher volatility (10.08%) compared to MUSQ (6.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DVXC dropped -26.47% vs MUSQ's -23.11%.

Which ETF is better, DVXC or MUSQ?

On 1-year performance, DVXC leads with -5.14% vs -8.84% for MUSQ. On fees, MUSQ is cheaper at 0.76% per year. On volatility, MUSQ has been the lower-risk option at 6.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DVXC or MUSQ?

Over the 1-year period, DVXC has performed better with a -5.14% return vs -8.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DVXC or MUSQ?

MUSQ is cheaper with a 0.76% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for DVXC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DVXC or MUSQ?

MUSQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.72%, compared with 0.00% for DVXC.

What is the main difference between DVXC and MUSQ?

DVXC tracks Syntax Defined Volatility XLC Index, while MUSQ tracks MUSQ Global Music Industry Index. They also come from different issuers: WEBs and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for DVXC and 0.76% for MUSQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DVXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.27 vs -0.59), 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.