IPOS vs. QLTI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IPOS (Renaissance International IPO ETF) and QLTI (GMO International Quality ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. IPOS is passively managed, while QLTI is actively managed. Over the past year, IPOS returned 76.08% vs 6.03% for QLTI. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IPOS charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QLTI.

Performance

IPOS vs. QLTI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS) and GMO International Quality ETF (QLTI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPOS achieves a 48.14% return, which is significantly higher than QLTI's -0.68% return.

IPOS

• 1D: -4.56%
• 1M: 15.69%
• YTD: 48.14%
• 6M: 46.95%
• 1Y: 76.08%
• 3Y*: 20.01%
• 5Y*: -6.66%
• 10Y*: 4.08%

QLTI

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: 1.30%
• YTD: -0.68%
• 6M: -0.63%
• 1Y: 6.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IPOS vs. QLTI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IPOS Renaissance International IPO ETF	48.14%	39.93%	-1.98%
QLTI GMO International Quality ETF	-0.68%	17.12%	-7.94%

Correlation

The correlation between IPOS and QLTI is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 29, 2024	0.49

Return for Risk

IPOS vs. QLTI — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPOS

IPOS Risk / Return Rank: 77
IPOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
IPOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
IPOS Omega Ratio Rank: 77
IPOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
IPOS Martin Ratio Rank: 76

QLTI

QLTI Risk / Return Rank: 14
QLTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
QLTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
QLTI Omega Ratio Rank: 14
QLTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
QLTI Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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.

IPOS vs. QLTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS) and GMO International Quality ETF (QLTI). 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.

	IPOS	QLTI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.36	0.39	+1.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.88	0.67	+2.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.08	+0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.46	0.44	+4.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.34	1.23	+12.10

IPOS vs. QLTI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPOS Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is higher than the QLTI Sharpe Ratio of 0.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPOS and QLTI, 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

IPOS vs. QLTI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPOS drawdown since its inception was -73.09%, which is greater than QLTI's maximum drawdown of -14.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPOS and QLTI.

Drawdown Indicators

	IPOS	QLTI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-73.09%	-14.82%	-58.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.17%	-13.72%	-3.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.08%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.93%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-73.09%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.05%	-6.11%	-30.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.02%	-3.82%	-28.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.72%	4.90%	+0.82%

Volatility

IPOS vs. QLTI - Volatility Comparison

Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS) has a higher volatility of 15.81% compared to GMO International Quality ETF (QLTI) at 4.63%. This indicates that IPOS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QLTI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IPOS	QLTI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.81%	4.63%	+11.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.95%	12.82%	+17.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.50%	15.54%	+16.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.95%	16.73%	+11.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.41%	16.73%	+7.68%

IPOS vs. QLTI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPOS has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than QLTI's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

IPOS vs. QLTI - Dividend Comparison

IPOS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.32%, less than QLTI's 0.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IPOS Renaissance International IPO ETF	0.32%	1.04%	0.93%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.25%	0.89%	1.12%	0.87%	1.73%	1.08%
QLTI GMO International Quality ETF	0.52%	0.52%	0.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IPOS and QLTI in my portfolio?

IPOS and QLTI have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IPOS or QLTI?

IPOS has higher volatility (15.81%) compared to QLTI (4.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPOS dropped -73.09% vs QLTI's -14.82%.

Which ETF is better, IPOS or QLTI?

On 1-year performance, IPOS leads with 76.08% vs 6.03% for QLTI. On fees, QLTI is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QLTI has been the lower-risk option at 4.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IPOS or QLTI?

Over the 1-year period, IPOS has performed better with a 76.08% return vs 6.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IPOS or QLTI?

QLTI is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for IPOS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IPOS or QLTI?

QLTI has the higher dividend yield at 0.52%, compared with 0.32% for IPOS.

What is the main difference between IPOS and QLTI?

They also come from different issuers: Renaissance Capital and GMO. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for IPOS and 0.60% for QLTI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IPOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 0.39), 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.