GPZ vs. QABA

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about VanEck ETF Trust (GPZ) and First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA).

GPZ and QABA are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GPZ is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the MarketVector Alternative Asset Managers Index. It was launched on Jun 4, 2025. QABA is a passively managed fund by First Trust that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ OMX ABA Community Bank Index. It was launched on Jun 29, 2009. Both GPZ and QABA are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

GPZ vs. QABA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck ETF Trust (GPZ) and First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GPZ vs. QABA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GPZ VanEck ETF Trust	-20.90%	9.43%
QABA First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund	3.40%	11.32%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GPZ achieves a -20.90% return, which is significantly lower than QABA's 3.40% return.

GPZ

• 1D: 2.65%
• 1M: -2.74%
• YTD: -20.90%
• 6M: -21.63%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QABA

• 1D: 1.52%
• 1M: -0.25%
• YTD: 3.40%
• 6M: 5.20%
• 1Y: 14.29%
• 3Y*: 13.70%
• 5Y*: 2.93%
• 10Y*: 7.10%

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

GPZ vs. QABA - Expense Ratio Comparison

GPZ has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than QABA's 0.60% expense ratio.

QABA

First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund

GPZ

VanEck ETF Trust

Return for Risk

GPZ vs. QABA — Risk / Return Rank

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

QABA

QABA Risk / Return Rank: 34
QABA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
QABA Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
QABA Omega Ratio Rank: 31
QABA Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
QABA Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

GPZ vs. QABA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck ETF Trust (GPZ) and First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GPZ	QABA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	0.56	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.25	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.61	0.33	-0.94

Correlation

The correlation between GPZ and QABA is 0.59, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

GPZ vs. QABA - Dividend Comparison

GPZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, less than QABA's 2.51% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GPZ VanEck ETF Trust	1.05%	0.83%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QABA First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund	2.51%	2.52%	2.37%	2.71%	2.10%	1.68%	2.55%	1.95%	1.90%	1.42%	1.13%	1.39%

Drawdowns

GPZ vs. QABA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GPZ drawdown since its inception was -31.72%, smaller than the maximum QABA drawdown of -49.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPZ and QABA.

Drawdown Indicators

	GPZ	QABA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.72%	-49.30%	+17.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-12.49%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-42.93%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-49.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.34%	-8.47%	-18.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.54%	-11.51%	+1.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	5.39%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GPZ	QABA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.72%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	16.96%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.76%	25.50%	+1.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.76%	26.59%	+0.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.76%	28.71%	-1.95%