LOHA vs. QTUM
LOHA (Roundhill HALO ETF) and QTUM (Defiance Quantum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LOHA is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Akros U.S. Heavy Assets Low Obsolescence (HALO) Index, while QTUM is a Technology Equities fund tracking the BlueStar Machine Learning and Quantum Computing Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LOHA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for QTUM.
Performance
LOHA vs. QTUM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
LOHA
- 1D
- 1.56%
- 1M
- 2.99%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QTUM
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- 1.19%
- YTD
- 46.66%
- 6M
- 44.23%
- 1Y
- 79.78%
- 3Y*
- 50.10%
- 5Y*
- 27.89%
- 10Y*
- —
LOHA vs. QTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
LOHA Roundhill HALO ETF | 2.99% |
QTUM Defiance Quantum ETF | 9.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between LOHA and QTUM is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2026 | 0.31 |
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
LOHA vs. QTUM — Risk / Return Rank
LOHA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
QTUM
LOHA vs. QTUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill HALO ETF (LOHA) and Defiance Quantum ETF (QTUM). 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.
| LOHA | QTUM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.44 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 5.26 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 18.84 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LOHA vs. QTUM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LOHA drawdown since its inception was -2.48%, smaller than the maximum QTUM drawdown of -38.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LOHA and QTUM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LOHA | QTUM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.48% | -38.45% | +35.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -15.26% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -25.39% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -38.45% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -4.89% | +4.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.90% | -8.22% | +7.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 4.25% | — |
Volatility
LOHA vs. QTUM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LOHA | QTUM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 14.51% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 23.72% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.09% | 29.11% | -14.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.09% | 27.18% | -12.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.09% | 27.47% | -12.38% |
LOHA vs. QTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison
LOHA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than QTUM's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
LOHA vs. QTUM - Dividend Comparison
LOHA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QTUM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LOHA Roundhill HALO ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QTUM Defiance Quantum ETF | 0.73% | 1.01% | 0.61% | 0.81% | 1.46% | 0.48% | 0.42% | 0.61% | 0.21% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LOHA and QTUM have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LOHA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LOHA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for QTUM.
QTUM has the higher dividend yield at 0.73%, compared with 0.00% for LOHA.
LOHA is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while QTUM is Technology Equities. LOHA tracks Akros U.S. Heavy Assets Low Obsolescence (HALO) Index, while QTUM tracks BlueStar Machine Learning and Quantum Computing Index. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Defiance. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for LOHA and 0.40% for QTUM.
Find the right allocation for LOHA and QTUM
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