FAAR vs. QMOM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FAAR (First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF) and QMOM (Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FAAR is a Commodities fund actively managed by First Trust, while QMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, FAAR returned 5.17%/yr vs 13.82%/yr for QMOM. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FAAR charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QMOM.

Performance

FAAR vs. QMOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with FAAR having a 25.73% return and QMOM slightly lower at 24.65%. Over the past 10 years, FAAR has underperformed QMOM with an annualized return of 5.17%, while QMOM has yielded a comparatively higher 13.82% annualized return.

FAAR

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -0.79%
• YTD: 25.73%
• 6M: 23.17%
• 1Y: 40.73%
• 3Y*: 11.79%
• 5Y*: 8.07%
• 10Y*: 5.17%

QMOM

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 6.10%
• YTD: 24.65%
• 6M: 26.71%
• 1Y: 31.51%
• 3Y*: 23.22%
• 5Y*: 11.55%
• 10Y*: 13.82%

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

FAAR vs. QMOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FAAR First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF	25.73%	8.07%	5.97%	-5.63%	10.15%	12.34%	8.60%	-1.28%	-9.17%	5.00%
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	24.65%	2.36%	30.43%	9.50%	-6.99%	-4.06%	61.94%	28.39%	-11.75%	15.92%

Correlation

The correlation between FAAR and QMOM is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.05
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.04
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2016	0.10

The correlation between FAAR and QMOM shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.12 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FAAR vs. QMOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FAAR	QMOM
Financial Services	100.0%	1.9%
Basic Materials	-	9.0%
Communication Services	-	4.2%
Consumer Cyclical	-	7.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.6%
Energy	-	5.5%
Healthcare	-	8.9%
Industrials	-	37.5%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	23.9%
Utilities	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

FAAR vs. QMOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAAR

FAAR Risk / Return Rank: 90
FAAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FAAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
FAAR Omega Ratio Rank: 84
FAAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
FAAR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

QMOM

QMOM Risk / Return Rank: 42
QMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
QMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
QMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 37
QMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
QMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

FAAR vs. QMOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). 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.

	FAAR	QMOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.04	1.36	+1.68
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.23	1.91	+2.32
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.25	+0.27
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.44	2.50	+5.94
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	23.64	9.15	+14.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FAAR vs. QMOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.04, which is higher than the QMOM Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAAR and QMOM, 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

	FAAR	QMOM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.04	1.36	+1.68
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62	0.48	+0.14
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45	0.52	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.52	-0.07

Drawdowns

FAAR vs. QMOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAAR drawdown since its inception was -18.03%, smaller than the maximum QMOM drawdown of -39.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAAR and QMOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FAAR	QMOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.03%	-39.13%	+21.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.85%	-12.65%	+7.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.54%	-26.46%	+14.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.03%	-26.82%	+8.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-18.03%	-39.13%	+21.10%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.11%	-0.37%	-0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.85%	-12.92%	+5.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.73%	3.45%	-1.72%

Volatility

FAAR vs. QMOM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) is 2.44%, while Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) has a volatility of 8.32%. This indicates that FAAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FAAR	QMOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.44%	8.32%	-5.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.72%	19.78%	-10.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.48%	23.30%	-9.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.02%	24.19%	-11.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.51%	26.49%	-14.98%

FAAR vs. QMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAAR has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QMOM's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

FAAR vs. QMOM - Dividend Comparison

FAAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.15%, more than QMOM's 0.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FAAR First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF	9.15%	11.63%	3.45%	3.20%	5.82%	6.49%	3.05%	1.02%	0.58%	2.83%	0.00%
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	0.44%	0.54%	1.40%	0.87%	1.59%	0.12%	0.08%	0.01%	0.05%	0.13%	0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FAAR and QMOM in my portfolio?

FAAR and QMOM have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FAAR or QMOM?

QMOM has higher volatility (8.32%) compared to FAAR (2.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAAR dropped -18.03% vs QMOM's -39.13%.

Which ETF is better, FAAR or QMOM?

On 10-year performance, QMOM leads with 13.82% vs 5.17% for FAAR. On fees, QMOM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, FAAR has been the lower-risk option at 2.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FAAR or QMOM?

Over the 10-year period, QMOM has performed better with a 13.82% return vs 5.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FAAR or QMOM?

QMOM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FAAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FAAR or QMOM?

FAAR has the higher dividend yield at 9.15%, compared with 0.44% for QMOM.

What is the main difference between FAAR and QMOM?

FAAR is categorized as Commodities, while QMOM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FAAR and 0.28% for QMOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FAAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.04 vs 1.36), 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.