LOGO vs. EUSA
LOGO (Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF) and EUSA (iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. LOGO is actively managed, while EUSA is passively managed. Over the past year, LOGO returned 4.09% vs 19.17% for EUSA. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LOGO charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for EUSA.
Performance
LOGO vs. EUSA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LOGO achieves a 0.33% return, which is significantly lower than EUSA's 10.04% return.
LOGO
- 1D
- 5.13%
- 1M
- 2.53%
- YTD
- 0.33%
- 6M
- -0.33%
- 1Y
- 4.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EUSA
- 1D
- 0.81%
- 1M
- 3.88%
- YTD
- 10.04%
- 6M
- 10.00%
- 1Y
- 19.17%
- 3Y*
- 16.37%
- 5Y*
- 7.90%
- 10Y*
- 11.57%
LOGO vs. EUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LOGO Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF | 0.33% | 5.34% |
EUSA iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF | 10.04% | 9.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between LOGO and EUSA is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2025 | 0.72 |
The correlation between LOGO and EUSA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
LOGO vs. EUSA — Risk / Return Rank
LOGO
EUSA
LOGO vs. EUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF (LOGO) and iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF (EUSA). 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.
| LOGO | EUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.89 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.28 | -0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.22 | 2.46 | -2.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.56 | 9.76 | -9.20 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LOGO | EUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 | 1.63 | -1.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.47 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.63 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.36 | 0.71 | -0.35 |
Drawdowns
LOGO vs. EUSA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LOGO drawdown since its inception was -18.34%, smaller than the maximum EUSA drawdown of -39.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LOGO and EUSA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LOGO | EUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.34% | -39.16% | +20.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.34% | -7.82% | -10.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.20% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.24% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -39.16% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.48% | 0.00% | -6.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.76% | -4.59% | -1.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.37% | 1.97% | +5.40% |
Volatility
LOGO vs. EUSA - Volatility Comparison
Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF (LOGO) has a higher volatility of 8.32% compared to iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF (EUSA) at 2.93%. This indicates that LOGO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EUSA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LOGO | EUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.32% | 2.93% | +5.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.93% | 8.75% | +4.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.77% | 11.80% | +3.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.68% | 16.95% | -1.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.68% | 18.34% | -2.66% |
LOGO vs. EUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison
LOGO has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than EUSA's 0.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
LOGO vs. EUSA - Dividend Comparison
LOGO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EUSA iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF | 1.51% | 1.63% | 1.47% | 1.53% | 1.73% | 1.23% | 1.45% | 1.49% | 2.01% | 1.50% | 1.59% | 2.21% |
LOGO Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LOGO and EUSA have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LOGO has higher volatility (8.32%) compared to EUSA (2.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LOGO dropped -18.34% vs EUSA's -39.16%.
On 1-year performance, EUSA leads with 19.17% vs 4.09% for LOGO. On fees, EUSA is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, EUSA has been the lower-risk option at 2.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EUSA has performed better with a 19.17% return vs 4.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EUSA is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for LOGO.
EUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.51%, compared with 0.00% for LOGO.
They also come from different issuers: Alpha Brands and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for LOGO and 0.09% for EUSA.
EUSA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 0.26), 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.
Find the right allocation for LOGO and EUSA
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