PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FAD vs. QMOM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FAD vs. QMOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FAD achieves a 15.78% return, which is significantly higher than QMOM's 14.85% return. Over the past 10 years, FAD has outperformed QMOM with an annualized return of 13.98%, while QMOM has yielded a comparatively lower 12.53% annualized return.


FAD

1D
-1.66%
1M
-1.48%
6M
10.44%
YTD
15.78%
1Y
28.16%
3Y*
20.77%
5Y*
10.47%
10Y*
13.98%

QMOM

1D
-1.35%
1M
-5.21%
6M
8.94%
YTD
14.85%
1Y
20.78%
3Y*
17.72%
5Y*
10.18%
10Y*
12.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FAD vs. QMOM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FAD
First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund
15.78%17.23%23.85%19.07%-24.06%21.17%34.92%26.66%-6.45%25.75%
QMOM
Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF
14.85%2.36%30.43%9.50%-6.99%-4.06%61.94%28.39%-11.75%15.92%

Correlation

The correlation between FAD and QMOM is 0.88, 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

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.88

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2016

0.83

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

FAD vs. QMOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FAD
QMOM

Technology

27.4%
24.6%

Industrials

25.0%
25.6%

Healthcare

14.8%
8.0%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
6.0%

Financial Services

7.8%
1.9%

Real Estate

3.9%

-

Communication Services

3.1%
2.0%

Basic Materials

2.9%
15.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.2%
2.0%

Utilities

1.5%
2.0%

Energy

1.3%
16.0%

Technology

FAD
27.4%
QMOM
24.6%

Industrials

FAD
25.0%
QMOM
25.6%

Healthcare

FAD
14.8%
QMOM
8.0%

Consumer Cyclical

FAD
10.1%
QMOM
6.0%

Financial Services

FAD
7.8%
QMOM
1.9%

Real Estate

FAD
3.9%
QMOM

-

Communication Services

FAD
3.1%
QMOM
2.0%

Basic Materials

FAD
2.9%
QMOM
15.9%

Consumer Defensive

FAD
2.2%
QMOM
2.0%

Utilities

FAD
1.5%
QMOM
2.0%

Energy

FAD
1.3%
QMOM
16.0%

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

FAD vs. QMOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAD
FAD Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
FAD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FAD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
FAD Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
FAD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
FAD Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

QMOM
QMOM Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
QMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
QMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FAD vs. QMOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD) 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.

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.


FADQMOMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.16

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.65

1.65

+1.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.68

5.63

+4.05

FAD vs. QMOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAD Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is higher than the QMOM Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAD 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FAD vs. QMOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAD drawdown since its inception was -54.33%, which is greater than QMOM's maximum drawdown of -39.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAD and QMOM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FADQMOMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-54.33%

-39.13%

-15.20%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.66%

-12.65%

+1.99%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.55%

-26.46%

+2.91%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.99%

-26.82%

-5.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.25%

-39.13%

+1.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.34%

-8.20%

+1.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.60%

-12.85%

+3.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.92%

3.70%

-0.78%

Volatility

FAD vs. QMOM - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) have volatilities of 7.75% and 8.10%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FADQMOMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.75%

8.10%

-0.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.91%

21.44%

-5.53%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.17%

25.00%

-4.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.86%

24.44%

-3.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.31%

26.65%

-5.34%

FAD vs. QMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAD has a 0.63% expense ratio, which is higher than QMOM's 0.28% expense ratio.


Dividends

FAD vs. QMOM - Dividend Comparison

FAD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%, less than QMOM's 0.47% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FAD
First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund
0.09%0.09%0.59%0.51%0.60%0.09%0.32%0.48%0.20%0.22%0.64%0.41%
QMOM
Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF
0.47%0.54%1.40%0.87%1.59%0.12%0.08%0.01%0.05%0.13%0.34%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FAD and QMOM have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QMOM has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to FAD (7.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAD dropped -54.33% vs QMOM's -39.13%.

On 10-year performance, FAD leads with 13.98% vs 12.53% for QMOM. On fees, QMOM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, FAD has been the lower-risk option at 7.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FAD has performed better with a 13.98% return vs 12.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QMOM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for FAD.

QMOM has the higher dividend yield at 0.47%, compared with 0.09% for FAD.

FAD is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while QMOM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.63% for FAD and 0.28% for QMOM.

FAD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 0.84), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FAD and QMOM

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