HQGO vs. SQLV

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

HQGO (Hartford US Quality Growth ETF) and SQLV (Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF) are both Quality Factor funds. HQGO is passively managed, while SQLV is actively managed. Over the past year, HQGO returned 23.04% vs 40.94% for SQLV. Their 0.65 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. HQGO charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for SQLV.

Performance

HQGO vs. SQLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Hartford US Quality Growth ETF (HQGO) and Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HQGO achieves a 11.00% return, which is significantly lower than SQLV's 26.53% return.

HQGO

• 1D: 1.39%
• 1M: 2.07%
• 6M: 9.26%
• YTD: 11.00%
• 1Y: 23.04%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.56%

SQLV

• 1D: 2.40%
• 1M: 3.42%
• 6M: 19.47%
• YTD: 26.53%
• 1Y: 40.94%
• 3Y*: 13.50%
• 5Y*: 8.73%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.20%

*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)
HQGO Hartford US Quality Growth ETF	$5.49K	$7.53K	$51.76K
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	$1.21M	$631.84K	$254.10K

HQGO vs. SQLV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HQGO Hartford US Quality Growth ETF	11.00%	15.15%	25.09%	5.10%
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	26.53%	2.50%	4.76%	9.11%

Correlation

The correlation between HQGO and SQLV is 0.61, 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.	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2023	0.65

The correlation between HQGO and SQLV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

HQGO vs. SQLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HQGO	SQLV
Technology	42.3%	15.9%
Consumer Cyclical	12.3%	13.8%
Healthcare	10.4%	18.7%
Communication Services	9.9%	6.0%
Industrials	7.0%	10.3%
Financial Services	6.7%	19.0%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	7.4%
Energy	3.9%	4.0%
Basic Materials	2.2%	3.8%
Real Estate	0.9%	0.9%
Utilities	0.1%	0.2%

Return for Risk

HQGO vs. SQLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

HQGO

HQGO Risk / Return Rank: 62
HQGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
HQGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
HQGO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
HQGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
HQGO Martin Ratio Rank: 64

SQLV

SQLV Risk / Return Rank: 90
SQLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
SQLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
SQLV Omega Ratio Rank: 87
SQLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
SQLV Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

HQGO vs. SQLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hartford US Quality Growth ETF (HQGO) and Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV). 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.

	HQGO	SQLV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.63	2.38	-0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.27	3.46	-1.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.40	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.23	4.65	-2.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.45	14.61	-6.16

HQGO vs. SQLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HQGO Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is lower than the SQLV Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HQGO and SQLV, 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

HQGO vs. SQLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HQGO drawdown since its inception was -20.85%, smaller than the maximum SQLV drawdown of -48.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HQGO and SQLV.

Drawdown Indicators

	HQGO	SQLV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.85%	-48.34%	+27.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.40%	-8.84%	-1.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-26.86%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.10%	0.00%	-0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.52%	-8.80%	+6.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.73%	2.81%	-0.08%

Volatility

HQGO vs. SQLV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Hartford US Quality Growth ETF (HQGO) is 3.62%, while Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) has a volatility of 4.92%. This indicates that HQGO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SQLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HQGO	SQLV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.62%	4.92%	-1.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.83%	11.82%	-0.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.18%	17.32%	-3.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.90%	20.90%	-4.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.90%	23.25%	-6.35%

HQGO vs. SQLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

HQGO has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is lower than SQLV's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

HQGO vs. SQLV - Dividend Comparison

HQGO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.45%, less than SQLV's 0.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
HQGO Hartford US Quality Growth ETF	0.45%	0.51%	0.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	0.93%	1.15%	1.11%	1.09%	1.24%	1.12%	1.22%	1.20%	1.08%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HQGO and SQLV in my portfolio?

HQGO and SQLV have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HQGO or SQLV?

SQLV has higher volatility (4.92%) compared to HQGO (3.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HQGO dropped -20.85% vs SQLV's -48.34%.

Which ETF is better, HQGO or SQLV?

On 1-year performance, SQLV leads with 40.94% vs 23.04% for HQGO. On fees, HQGO is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, HQGO has been the lower-risk option at 3.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HQGO or SQLV?

Over the 1-year period, SQLV has performed better with a 40.94% return vs 23.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HQGO or SQLV?

HQGO is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SQLV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HQGO or SQLV?

SQLV has the higher dividend yield at 0.93%, compared with 0.45% for HQGO.

What is the main difference between HQGO and SQLV?

They also come from different issuers: Hartford and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for HQGO and 0.60% for SQLV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SQLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.63), 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.