FQAL vs. ROE

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FQAL (Fidelity Quality Factor ETF) and ROE (Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF) are both Quality Factor funds. FQAL is passively managed, while ROE is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FQAL returned 17.90%/yr vs 20.30%/yr for ROE. Their correlation of 0.87 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FQAL charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for ROE.

Performance

FQAL vs. ROE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FQAL achieves a 9.52% return, which is significantly lower than ROE's 20.35% return.

FQAL

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: 0.93%
• 6M: 7.92%
• YTD: 9.52%
• 1Y: 18.77%
• 3Y*: 17.90%
• 5Y*: 11.43%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.45%

ROE

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: 0.63%
• 6M: 16.21%
• YTD: 20.35%
• 1Y: 33.36%
• 3Y*: 20.30%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 20.32%

*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)
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF	$3.79M	$3.24M	$3.26M
ROE Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF	$1.20M	$1.18M	$910.23K

FQAL vs. ROE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF	9.52%	16.93%	21.92%	4.74%
ROE Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF	20.35%	17.20%	18.34%	4.31%

Correlation

The correlation between FQAL and ROE is 0.82, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2023	0.87

The correlation between FQAL and ROE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

FQAL vs. ROE - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FQAL	ROE
Technology	36.7%	33.9%
Financial Services	12.0%	11.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	11.0%
Industrials	9.4%	9.0%
Communication Services	9.3%	11.1%
Healthcare	9.1%	10.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	4.9%
Energy	3.3%	2.9%
Basic Materials	2.1%	1.0%
Real Estate	2.1%	2.0%
Utilities	2.0%	2.0%

Return for Risk

FQAL vs. ROE — Risk / Return Rank

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

FQAL

FQAL Risk / Return Rank: 66
FQAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
FQAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
FQAL Omega Ratio Rank: 65
FQAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
FQAL Martin Ratio Rank: 74

ROE

ROE Risk / Return Rank: 88
ROE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
ROE Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
ROE Omega Ratio Rank: 85
ROE Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
ROE Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

FQAL vs. ROE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE). 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.

	FQAL	ROE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.51	2.14	-0.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	2.88	-0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.37	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.08	3.72	-1.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.21	15.82	-6.61

FQAL vs. ROE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FQAL Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is comparable to the ROE Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FQAL and ROE, 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

FQAL vs. ROE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FQAL drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, which is greater than ROE's maximum drawdown of -19.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FQAL and ROE.

Drawdown Indicators

	FQAL	ROE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.71%	-19.10%	-14.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.43%	-8.66%	+0.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.87%	-19.10%	+2.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.50%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.42%	-1.30%	+0.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.53%	-2.54%	-1.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.90%	2.03%	-0.13%

Volatility

FQAL vs. ROE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) is 2.43%, while Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE) has a volatility of 3.59%. This indicates that FQAL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ROE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FQAL	ROE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.43%	3.59%	-1.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.94%	11.81%	-2.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.60%	15.07%	-3.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.20%	15.87%	+0.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.49%	15.87%	+1.62%

FQAL vs. ROE - Expense Ratio Comparison

FQAL has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than ROE's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FQAL vs. ROE - Dividend Comparison

FQAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, more than ROE's 1.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF	1.15%	1.12%	1.20%	1.35%	1.52%	1.17%	1.46%	1.55%	1.73%	1.53%	0.43%
ROE Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF	1.01%	0.97%	1.18%	0.68%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FQAL and ROE in my portfolio?

FQAL and ROE have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FQAL or ROE?

ROE has higher volatility (3.59%) compared to FQAL (2.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FQAL dropped -33.71% vs ROE's -19.10%.

Which ETF is better, FQAL or ROE?

On 3-year performance, ROE leads with 20.30% vs 17.90% for FQAL. On fees, FQAL is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, FQAL has been the lower-risk option at 2.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FQAL or ROE?

Over the 3-year period, ROE has performed better with a 20.30% return vs 17.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FQAL or ROE?

FQAL is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ROE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FQAL or ROE?

FQAL has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 1.01% for ROE.

What is the main difference between FQAL and ROE?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Astoria. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FQAL and 0.49% for ROE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ROE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.51), 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.