LEAD vs. QWLD

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

LEAD (Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF) and QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - LEAD tracks the Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index while QWLD tracks the MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LEAD returned 14.17%/yr vs 11.57%/yr for QWLD. Their 0.76 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LEAD charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for QWLD.

Performance

LEAD vs. QWLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LEAD achieves a 13.06% return, which is significantly higher than QWLD's 9.39% return. Over the past 10 years, LEAD has outperformed QWLD with an annualized return of 14.17%, while QWLD has yielded a comparatively lower 11.57% annualized return.

LEAD

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -1.57%
• 6M: 8.09%
• YTD: 13.06%
• 1Y: 19.57%
• 3Y*: 15.45%
• 5Y*: 11.12%
• 10Y*: 14.17%
• ALL TIME*: 14.29%

QWLD

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 1.63%
• 6M: 6.46%
• YTD: 9.39%
• 1Y: 19.11%
• 3Y*: 15.49%
• 5Y*: 10.03%
• 10Y*: 11.57%
• ALL TIME*: 10.49%

*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)
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	$231.12K	$297.84K	$1.04M

LEAD vs. QWLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LEAD Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF	13.06%	15.52%	10.32%	26.25%	-18.16%	29.69%	23.41%	33.75%	-6.63%	24.89%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	9.39%	17.93%	14.44%	19.59%	-13.30%	21.57%	10.24%	27.59%	-7.02%	22.44%

Correlation

The correlation between LEAD and QWLD is 0.71, 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.	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.87
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 6, 2016	0.76

The correlation between LEAD and QWLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.87 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LEAD vs. QWLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LEAD	QWLD
Technology	41.5%	24.9%
Industrials	33.3%	10.9%
Financial Services	15.8%	16.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	8.1%
Healthcare	2.1%	13.2%
Consumer Cyclical	1.8%	6.3%
Energy	1.5%	3.4%
Communication Services	0.1%	9.5%
Basic Materials	-	2.5%
Real Estate	-	1.0%
Utilities	-	3.8%

Return for Risk

LEAD vs. QWLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

LEAD

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

QWLD

QWLD Risk / Return Rank: 80
QWLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QWLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
QWLD Omega Ratio Rank: 82
QWLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
QWLD Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

LEAD vs. QWLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). 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.

	LEAD	QWLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.21	1.93	-0.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.71	2.75	-1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.34	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.27	2.44	-0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.28	10.67	-2.39

LEAD vs. QWLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEAD Sharpe Ratio is 1.21, which is lower than the QWLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEAD and QWLD, 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

LEAD vs. QWLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEAD drawdown since its inception was -32.19%, roughly equal to the maximum QWLD drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEAD and QWLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	LEAD	QWLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.19%	-31.89%	-0.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.65%	-7.66%	-0.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.86%	-12.40%	-5.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.93%	-22.84%	-2.09%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.19%	-31.89%	-0.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.25%	0.00%	-6.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.41%	-3.66%	-0.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.37%	1.75%	+0.62%

Volatility

LEAD vs. QWLD - Volatility Comparison

Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) has a higher volatility of 6.62% compared to SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) at 2.30%. This indicates that LEAD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QWLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LEAD	QWLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.62%	2.30%	+4.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.31%	7.73%	+5.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.27%	9.71%	+6.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.68%	13.51%	+4.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.75%	15.12%	+3.63%

LEAD vs. QWLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEAD has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than QWLD's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

LEAD vs. QWLD - Dividend Comparison

LEAD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QWLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LEAD Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF	0.58%	0.70%	0.93%	1.13%	1.27%	1.79%	0.81%	1.32%	1.38%	0.97%	1.38%	0.00%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	1.79%	1.85%	1.74%	1.78%	2.02%	1.77%	1.77%	2.13%	2.33%	2.73%	2.22%	3.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LEAD and QWLD in my portfolio?

LEAD and QWLD have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LEAD or QWLD?

LEAD has higher volatility (6.62%) compared to QWLD (2.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LEAD dropped -32.19% vs QWLD's -31.89%.

Which ETF is better, LEAD or QWLD?

On 10-year performance, LEAD leads with 14.17% vs 11.57% for QWLD. On fees, QWLD is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LEAD or QWLD?

Over the 10-year period, LEAD has performed better with a 14.17% return vs 11.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LEAD or QWLD?

QWLD is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for LEAD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LEAD or QWLD?

QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 0.58% for LEAD.

What is the main difference between LEAD and QWLD?

LEAD tracks Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index, while QWLD tracks MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD). They also come from different issuers: SRN Advisors and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for LEAD and 0.30% for QWLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QWLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.21), 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.