LRNZ vs. QUS
LRNZ (TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF) and QUS (SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. LRNZ is actively managed, while QUS is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LRNZ returned 8.67%/yr vs 11.08%/yr for QUS. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LRNZ charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QUS.
Performance
LRNZ vs. QUS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LRNZ achieves a 30.91% return, which is significantly higher than QUS's 6.67% return.
LRNZ
- 1D
- -1.80%
- 1M
- 33.80%
- YTD
- 30.91%
- 6M
- 29.93%
- 1Y
- 47.93%
- 3Y*
- 26.33%
- 5Y*
- 8.67%
- 10Y*
- —
QUS
- 1D
- -0.43%
- 1M
- 2.68%
- YTD
- 6.67%
- 6M
- 6.93%
- 1Y
- 17.65%
- 3Y*
- 17.53%
- 5Y*
- 11.08%
- 10Y*
- 13.67%
LRNZ vs. QUS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF | 30.91% | 22.27% | 2.01% | 67.11% | -51.46% | -0.96% | 87.82% |
QUS SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF | 6.67% | 14.13% | 18.99% | 21.78% | -14.15% | 26.72% | 16.96% |
Correlation
The correlation between LRNZ and QUS is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2020 | 0.58 |
The correlation between LRNZ and QUS shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (1 year) to 0.64 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
LRNZ vs. QUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LRNZ
QUS
Technology
Healthcare
Communication Services
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
LRNZ
QUS
Healthcare
LRNZ
QUS
Communication Services
LRNZ
QUS
Basic Materials
LRNZ
-
QUS
Consumer Cyclical
LRNZ
-
QUS
Consumer Defensive
LRNZ
-
QUS
Energy
LRNZ
-
QUS
Financial Services
LRNZ
-
QUS
Industrials
LRNZ
-
QUS
Real Estate
LRNZ
-
QUS
Utilities
LRNZ
-
QUS
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
LRNZ vs. QUS — Risk / Return Rank
LRNZ
QUS
LRNZ vs. QUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) and 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.
| LRNZ | QUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.35 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.79 | 2.59 | -0.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.40 | 11.54 | -7.14 |
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
| LRNZ | QUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.67 | 1.95 | -0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 | 0.78 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.83 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.41 | 0.77 | -0.36 |
Drawdowns
LRNZ vs. QUS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LRNZ drawdown since its inception was -61.33%, which is greater than QUS's maximum drawdown of -33.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRNZ and QUS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LRNZ | QUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.33% | -33.78% | -27.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.89% | -6.85% | -20.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.10% | -13.94% | -19.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -61.33% | -22.30% | -39.03% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.78% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.56% | -0.50% | -2.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.67% | -3.70% | -22.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.93% | 1.53% | +9.40% |
Volatility
LRNZ vs. QUS - Volatility Comparison
TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) has a higher volatility of 10.33% compared to SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) at 1.78%. This indicates that LRNZ'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
| LRNZ | QUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.33% | 1.78% | +8.55% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.25% | 6.66% | +16.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.88% | 9.09% | +19.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.26% | 14.33% | +22.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.64% | 16.42% | +21.22% |
LRNZ vs. QUS - Expense Ratio Comparison
LRNZ has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than QUS's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
LRNZ vs. QUS - Dividend Comparison
LRNZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.13% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QUS SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF | 1.31% | 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
LRNZ and QUS have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LRNZ has higher volatility (10.33%) compared to QUS (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRNZ dropped -61.33% vs QUS's -33.78%.
On 5-year performance, QUS leads with 11.08% vs 8.67% for LRNZ. On fees, QUS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QUS has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QUS has performed better with a 11.08% return vs 8.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QUS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for LRNZ.
QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 0.00% for LRNZ.
They also come from different issuers: TrueMark Investments and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for LRNZ and 0.15% for QUS.
QUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 1.67), 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 LRNZ 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