MFIG vs. QUS
MFIG (Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF) and QUS (SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - MFIG tracks the Motley Fool Innovative Growth Index while QUS tracks the MSCI USA Factor Mix A-Series Capped (USD). Both are passively managed. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MFIG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QUS.
Performance
MFIG vs. QUS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MFIG achieves a 5.27% return, which is significantly lower than QUS's 9.19% return.
MFIG
- 1D
- -0.47%
- 1M
- 2.71%
- 6M
- 5.57%
- YTD
- 5.27%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QUS
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- 1.45%
- 6M
- 7.49%
- YTD
- 9.19%
- 1Y
- 17.93%
- 3Y*
- 16.72%
- 5Y*
- 11.09%
- 10Y*
- 13.49%
MFIG vs. QUS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF | 5.27% | -0.09% |
QUS SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF | 9.19% | 0.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between MFIG and QUS is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2025 | 0.72 |
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
MFIG vs. QUS — Risk / Return Rank
MFIG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
QUS
MFIG vs. QUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF (MFIG) 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.
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.
| MFIG | QUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.36 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.63 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 11.61 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MFIG vs. QUS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MFIG drawdown since its inception was -14.29%, smaller than the maximum QUS drawdown of -33.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFIG and QUS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MFIG | QUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.29% | -33.78% | +19.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -6.85% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -13.94% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.30% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.78% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.25% | 0.00% | -1.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.36% | -3.67% | -0.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.55% | — |
Volatility
MFIG vs. QUS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MFIG | QUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 2.38% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 6.95% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.90% | 9.12% | +7.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.90% | 14.34% | +2.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.90% | 16.38% | +0.52% |
MFIG vs. QUS - Expense Ratio Comparison
MFIG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than QUS's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
MFIG vs. QUS - Dividend Comparison
MFIG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor 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% |
QUS SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF | 1.28% | 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
MFIG and QUS have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QUS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QUS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MFIG.
QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.28%, compared with 0.00% for MFIG.
MFIG tracks Motley Fool Innovative Growth Index, while QUS tracks MSCI USA Factor Mix A-Series Capped (USD). They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MFIG and 0.15% for QUS.
Find the right allocation for MFIG 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