LENS vs. QVAL

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

LENS (Sarmaya Thematic ETF) and QVAL (Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LENS is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Alpha Architect, while QVAL is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LENS returned 47.33% vs 40.99% for QVAL. Their 0.29 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. LENS charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QVAL.

Performance

LENS vs. QVAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LENS achieves a 6.15% return, which is significantly lower than QVAL's 23.61% return.

LENS

• 1D: 0.99%
• 1M: 4.38%
• 6M: -10.73%
• YTD: 6.15%
• 1Y: 47.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 39.86%

QVAL

• 1D: 1.08%
• 1M: 6.25%
• 6M: 15.64%
• YTD: 23.61%
• 1Y: 40.99%
• 3Y*: 19.68%
• 5Y*: 13.33%
• 10Y*: 11.90%
• ALL TIME*: 11.77%

*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)
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	$413.47K	$347.71K	$437.62K
QVAL Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF	$1.37M	$1.72M	$1.47M

LENS vs. QVAL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	6.15%	56.41%
QVAL Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF	23.61%	7.58%

Correlation

The correlation between LENS and QVAL is 0.32, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2025	0.29

Return for Risk

LENS vs. QVAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LENS

LENS Risk / Return Rank: 52
LENS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
LENS Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
LENS Omega Ratio Rank: 62
LENS Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
LENS Martin Ratio Rank: 38

QVAL

QVAL Risk / Return Rank: 95
QVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
QVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 92
QVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
QVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

LENS vs. QVAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL). 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.

	LENS	QVAL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	2.89	-1.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	4.34	-2.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.49	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.94	6.82	-4.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.51	21.13	-16.62

LENS vs. QVAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LENS Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is lower than the QVAL Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LENS and QVAL, 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

LENS vs. QVAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LENS drawdown since its inception was -24.55%, smaller than the maximum QVAL drawdown of -51.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LENS and QVAL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LENS	QVAL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.55%	-51.49%	+26.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.55%	-6.04%	-18.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.41%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.17%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-51.49%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.11%	0.00%	-19.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.59%	-7.69%	+2.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.53%	1.95%	+8.58%

Volatility

LENS vs. QVAL - Volatility Comparison

Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) has a higher volatility of 5.48% compared to Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL) at 3.54%. This indicates that LENS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QVAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LENS	QVAL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.48%	3.54%	+1.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.98%	10.30%	+9.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.07%	14.29%	+13.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.50%	21.57%	+3.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.50%	22.70%	+2.80%

LENS vs. QVAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LENS has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than QVAL's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

LENS vs. QVAL - Dividend Comparison

LENS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, more than QVAL's 1.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	1.51%	1.60%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QVAL Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF	1.39%	1.44%	1.72%	1.76%	2.00%	1.23%	1.86%	1.99%	1.64%	1.08%	1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LENS and QVAL in my portfolio?

LENS and QVAL have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LENS or QVAL?

LENS has higher volatility (5.48%) compared to QVAL (3.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LENS dropped -24.55% vs QVAL's -51.49%.

Which ETF is better, LENS or QVAL?

On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 47.33% vs 40.99% for QVAL. On fees, QVAL is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QVAL has been the lower-risk option at 3.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LENS or QVAL?

Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 47.33% return vs 40.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LENS or QVAL?

QVAL is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LENS or QVAL?

LENS has the higher dividend yield at 1.51%, compared with 1.39% for QVAL.

What is the main difference between LENS and QVAL?

LENS is categorized as Global Equities, while QVAL is Mid Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for LENS and 0.28% for QVAL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.89 vs 1.70), 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.