LQAI vs. EQL

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

LQAI (LG QRAFT AI-Powered U.S. Large Cap Core ETF) and EQL (ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. LQAI is actively managed, while EQL is passively managed. Over the past year, LQAI returned 22.80% vs 18.34% for EQL. Their 0.72 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LQAI charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for EQL.

Performance

LQAI vs. EQL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LG QRAFT AI-Powered U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (LQAI) and ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LQAI achieves a 14.28% return, which is significantly higher than EQL's 10.71% return.

LQAI

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: -3.16%
• 6M: 11.94%
• YTD: 14.28%
• 1Y: 22.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 24.41%

EQL

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 0.31%
• 6M: 6.82%
• YTD: 10.71%
• 1Y: 18.34%
• 3Y*: 14.59%
• 5Y*: 10.63%
• 10Y*: 12.39%
• ALL TIME*: 13.49%

*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)
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	$3.33M	$2.84M	$2.70M
LQAI LG QRAFT AI-Powered U.S. Large Cap Core ETF	$9.07K	$10.19K	$17.32K

LQAI vs. EQL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LQAI LG QRAFT AI-Powered U.S. Large Cap Core ETF	14.28%	13.70%	27.82%	9.29%
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	10.71%	13.09%	16.44%	8.93%

Correlation

The correlation between LQAI and EQL is 0.57, 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.	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2023	0.72

The correlation between LQAI and EQL shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (1 year) to 0.72 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LQAI vs. EQL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LQAI	EQL
Technology	43.2%	10.2%
Financial Services	11.7%	9.1%
Communication Services	10.9%	8.9%
Utilities	8.2%	9.4%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	8.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.4%	9.6%
Industrials	3.9%	9.3%
Healthcare	2.8%	9.4%
Energy	2.2%	8.7%
Real Estate	1.9%	8.7%
Basic Materials	0.1%	8.0%

Return for Risk

LQAI vs. EQL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LQAI

LQAI Risk / Return Rank: 47
LQAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
LQAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
LQAI Omega Ratio Rank: 45
LQAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
LQAI Martin Ratio Rank: 46

EQL

EQL Risk / Return Rank: 79
EQL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EQL Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
EQL Omega Ratio Rank: 78
EQL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EQL Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

LQAI vs. EQL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LG QRAFT AI-Powered U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (LQAI) and ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL). 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.

	LQAI	EQL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.15	1.82	-0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.61	2.54	-0.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.33	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.98	2.78	-0.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.30	10.89	-5.59

LQAI vs. EQL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQAI Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is lower than the EQL Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQAI and EQL, 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

LQAI vs. EQL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQAI drawdown since its inception was -21.24%, smaller than the maximum EQL drawdown of -35.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQAI and EQL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LQAI	EQL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.24%	-35.65%	+14.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.75%	-6.19%	-4.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.07%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.24%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.65%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.64%	-0.27%	-7.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.13%	-3.23%	+0.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.01%	1.58%	+2.43%

Volatility

LQAI vs. EQL - Volatility Comparison

LG QRAFT AI-Powered U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (LQAI) has a higher volatility of 6.78% compared to ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) at 2.23%. This indicates that LQAI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LQAI	EQL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.78%	2.23%	+4.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.24%	7.03%	+8.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.60%	9.50%	+9.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.81%	14.51%	+3.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.81%	16.49%	+1.32%

LQAI vs. EQL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQAI has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than EQL's 0.27% expense ratio.

Dividends

LQAI vs. EQL - Dividend Comparison

LQAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, less than EQL's 1.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	1.35%	1.73%	1.78%	1.96%	2.14%	1.69%	2.29%	1.95%	2.39%	1.97%	2.89%	2.07%
LQAI LG QRAFT AI-Powered U.S. Large Cap Core ETF	0.95%	1.14%	0.69%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LQAI and EQL in my portfolio?

LQAI and EQL have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LQAI or EQL?

LQAI has higher volatility (6.78%) compared to EQL (2.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQAI dropped -21.24% vs EQL's -35.65%.

Which ETF is better, LQAI or EQL?

On 1-year performance, LQAI leads with 22.80% vs 18.34% for EQL. On fees, EQL is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, EQL has been the lower-risk option at 2.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LQAI or EQL?

Over the 1-year period, LQAI has performed better with a 22.80% return vs 18.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LQAI or EQL?

EQL is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LQAI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LQAI or EQL?

EQL has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.95% for LQAI.

What is the main difference between LQAI and EQL?

They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LQAI and 0.27% for EQL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.15), 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.