PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
LRGF vs. QUS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

LRGF vs. QUS

Last updated Aug 6, 2026
Documentation

LRGF (iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF) and QUS (State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - LRGF tracks the STOXX U.S. Equity Factor Index while QUS tracks the MSCI USA Factor Mix A-Series Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LRGF returned 13.96%/yr vs 13.70%/yr for QUS. Their correlation of 0.85 means they have usually moved in the same direction. LRGF charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QUS.

Performance

LRGF vs. QUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) and State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGF achieves a 13.46% return, which is significantly higher than QUS's 11.79% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with LRGF having a 13.96% annualized return and QUS not far behind at 13.70%.

LRGF

1D
-0.09%
1M
3.09%
6M
14.40%
YTD
13.46%
1Y
21.73%
3Y*
21.86%
5Y*
13.85%
10Y*
13.96%
ALL TIME*
12.60%

QUS

1D
0.02%
1M
2.61%
6M
9.40%
YTD
11.79%
1Y
20.72%
3Y*
17.66%
5Y*
11.08%
10Y*
13.70%
ALL TIME*
12.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

LRGF

iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF
$8.94M$9.99M$11.86M

QUS

State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF
$3.07M$4.72M$3.42M

LRGF vs. QUS - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LRGF
iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF		13.46%16.48%26.59%25.85%-14.77%25.01%11.11%26.11%-9.66%21.13%
QUS
State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF		11.79%14.13%18.99%21.78%-14.15%26.72%12.40%32.45%-3.66%21.67%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGF and QUS is 0.81, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.89

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.93

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 30, 2015

0.85

The correlation between LRGF and QUS shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (1 year) to 0.93 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LRGF vs. QUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
LRGF
QUS

Technology

37.3%
28.4%

Financial Services

11.7%
15.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.5%
5.7%

Communication Services

10.0%
8.2%

Healthcare

9.4%
14.4%

Industrials

8.3%
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
8.3%

Energy

3.1%
3.3%

Utilities

2.0%
3.9%

Basic Materials

1.8%
2.2%

Real Estate

1.1%
1.6%

Technology

LRGF
37.3%
QUS
28.4%

Financial Services

LRGF
11.7%
QUS
15.7%

Consumer Cyclical

LRGF
10.5%
QUS
5.7%

Communication Services

LRGF
10.0%
QUS
8.2%

Healthcare

LRGF
9.4%
QUS
14.4%

Industrials

LRGF
8.3%
QUS
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

LRGF
4.9%
QUS
8.3%

Energy

LRGF
3.1%
QUS
3.3%

Utilities

LRGF
2.0%
QUS
3.9%

Basic Materials

LRGF
1.8%
QUS
2.2%

Real Estate

LRGF
1.1%
QUS
1.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF

State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF

Often compared with LRGF:
LRGF vs. VOOLRGF vs. QUALLRGF vs. INTFLRGF vs. SPYLRGF vs. FNDALRGF vs. VVLRGF vs. JQUA
Often compared with QUS:
QUS vs. IVVQUS vs. QUALQUS vs. JQUAQUS vs. SPYQUS vs. VOOQUS vs. DGTQUS vs. BERZ

Return for Risk

LRGF vs. QUS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
LRGF
LRGF Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
LRGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LRGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
LRGF Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
LRGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
LRGF Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank
QUS
QUS Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
QUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
QUS Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
QUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
QUS Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

LRGF vs. QUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) and State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). 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.

LRGFQUSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.70
2.27

-0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.36
3.20

-0.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.41

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.45

3.04

-0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.52

13.56

-4.04

LRGF vs. QUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGF Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is comparable to the QUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGF and QUS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

LRGF vs. QUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGF drawdown since its inception was -36.03%, which is greater than QUS's maximum drawdown of -33.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGF and QUS.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

LRGFQUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.03%

-33.78%

-2.25%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.92%

-6.85%

-2.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.44%

-13.94%

-5.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.62%

-22.30%

+0.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.03%

-33.78%

-2.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.09%

0.00%

-0.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.50%

-3.66%

-0.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.29%

1.53%

+0.76%

Volatility

LRGF vs. QUS - Volatility Comparison

iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) has a higher volatility of 3.97% compared to State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) at 2.76%. This indicates that LRGF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

LRGFQUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.97%

2.76%

+1.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.18%

7.06%

+3.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.87%

9.21%

+3.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.12%

14.33%

+2.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.31%

16.40%

+1.91%

LRGF vs. QUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRGF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than QUS's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

LRGF vs. QUS - Dividend Comparison

LRGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, less than QUS's 1.25% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LRGF
iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF		1.05%1.16%1.23%1.49%1.78%1.05%1.35%1.76%3.27%1.68%1.56%0.83%
QUS
State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF		1.25%1.38%1.49%1.57%1.68%1.27%1.73%1.81%2.12%1.86%2.07%1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

LRGF and QUS have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LRGF has higher volatility (3.97%) compared to QUS (2.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGF dropped -36.03% vs QUS's -33.78%.

On 10-year performance, LRGF leads with 13.96% vs 13.70% for QUS. On fees, LRGF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, QUS has been the lower-risk option at 2.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, LRGF has performed better with a 13.96% return vs 13.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LRGF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for QUS.

QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 1.05% for LRGF.

LRGF tracks STOXX U.S. Equity Factor Index, while QUS tracks MSCI USA Factor Mix A-Series Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for LRGF and 0.15% for QUS.

QUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LRGF and QUS

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