PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWLG vs. QUS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWLG vs. QUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) and SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWLG achieves a 0.79% return, which is significantly lower than QUS's 9.32% return.


IWLG

1D
1.59%
1M
-1.34%
6M
3.98%
YTD
0.79%
1Y
6.14%
3Y*
18.86%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
21.32%

QUS

1D
0.33%
1M
0.45%
6M
7.38%
YTD
9.32%
1Y
18.81%
3Y*
16.09%
5Y*
10.75%
10Y*
13.56%
ALL TIME*
12.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$1.48M$1.36M$1.31M
$2.96M$4.90M$3.46M

IWLG vs. QUS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
IWLG
NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF
0.79%14.73%31.47%43.25%1.48%
QUS
SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF
9.32%14.13%18.99%21.78%4.41%

Correlation

The correlation between IWLG and QUS is 0.59, 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.

0.59

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2022

0.77

The correlation between IWLG and QUS shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.77 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWLG vs. QUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWLG
QUS

Technology

44.9%
28.4%

Industrials

17.2%
8.1%

Communication Services

15.6%
8.2%

Consumer Cyclical

8.7%
5.7%

Financial Services

7.0%
15.7%

Healthcare

5.4%
14.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.8%
8.3%

Utilities

1.4%
3.9%

Basic Materials

1.2%
2.2%

Energy

-

3.3%

Real Estate

-

1.6%

Technology

IWLG
44.9%
QUS
28.4%

Industrials

IWLG
17.2%
QUS
8.1%

Communication Services

IWLG
15.6%
QUS
8.2%

Consumer Cyclical

IWLG
8.7%
QUS
5.7%

Financial Services

IWLG
7.0%
QUS
15.7%

Healthcare

IWLG
5.4%
QUS
14.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWLG
1.8%
QUS
8.3%

Utilities

IWLG
1.4%
QUS
3.9%

Basic Materials

IWLG
1.2%
QUS
2.2%

Energy

IWLG

-

QUS
3.3%

Real Estate

IWLG

-

QUS
1.6%

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

IWLG vs. QUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWLG
IWLG Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
IWLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWLG Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
IWLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWLG Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

QUS
QUS Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
QUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
QUS Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
QUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
QUS Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IWLG vs. QUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) and SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). 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.


IWLGQUSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

1.35

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.20

2.60

-2.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.57

11.58

-11.01

IWLG vs. QUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWLG Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is lower than the QUS Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWLG and QUS, 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

IWLG vs. QUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWLG drawdown since its inception was -23.19%, smaller than the maximum QUS drawdown of -33.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWLG and QUS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWLGQUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.19%

-33.78%

+10.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.45%

-6.85%

-12.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.19%

-13.94%

-9.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.87%

-0.26%

-5.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.56%

-3.66%

-0.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.66%

1.53%

+5.13%

Volatility

IWLG vs. QUS - Volatility Comparison

NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) has a higher volatility of 6.55% compared to SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) at 2.37%. This indicates that IWLG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWLGQUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.55%

2.37%

+4.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.14%

6.94%

+8.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.72%

9.24%

+9.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.16%

14.32%

+6.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.16%

16.39%

+4.77%

IWLG vs. QUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWLG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than QUS's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWLG vs. QUS - Dividend Comparison

IWLG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWLG
NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%1.34%0.01%0.05%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QUS
SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF
1.28%1.38%1.49%1.57%1.68%1.27%1.73%1.81%2.12%1.86%2.07%1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWLG and QUS have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWLG has higher volatility (6.55%) compared to QUS (2.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWLG dropped -23.19% vs QUS's -33.78%.

On 3-year performance, IWLG leads with 18.86% vs 16.09% for QUS. On fees, QUS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QUS has been the lower-risk option at 2.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, IWLG has performed better with a 18.86% return vs 16.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QUS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IWLG.

QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.28%, compared with 0.00% for IWLG.

They also come from different issuers: NYLI and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IWLG and 0.15% for QUS.

QUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 0.20), 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 IWLG and QUS

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