MILN vs. GQGU
MILN (Global X Millennial Consumer ETF) and GQGU (GQG US Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. MILN is passively managed, while GQGU is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. MILN charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GQGU.
Performance
MILN vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MILN achieves a -9.79% return, which is significantly lower than GQGU's 6.60% return.
MILN
- 1D
- -1.10%
- 1M
- -3.21%
- YTD
- -9.79%
- 6M
- -9.62%
- 1Y
- -10.13%
- 3Y*
- 11.98%
- 5Y*
- 0.79%
- 10Y*
- 11.28%
GQGU
- 1D
- -1.06%
- 1M
- -1.65%
- YTD
- 6.60%
- 6M
- 7.16%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MILN vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MILN Global X Millennial Consumer ETF | -9.79% | -3.78% |
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 6.60% | -1.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between MILN and GQGU is -0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025 | -0.04 |
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
MILN vs. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank
MILN
GQGU
MILN vs. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Millennial Consumer ETF (MILN) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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.
| MILN | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.91 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.46 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.03 | — | — |
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
| MILN | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.60 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.04 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.52 | 0.60 | -0.08 |
Drawdowns
MILN vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MILN drawdown since its inception was -44.40%, which is greater than GQGU's maximum drawdown of -6.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MILN and GQGU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MILN | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.40% | -6.65% | -37.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.32% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.48% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.40% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.40% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.36% | -4.66% | -11.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.67% | -2.54% | -8.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.87% | — | — |
Volatility
MILN vs. GQGU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MILN | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.43% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.93% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.06% | 10.14% | +6.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.63% | 10.14% | +12.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.02% | 10.14% | +11.88% |
MILN vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
MILN has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
MILN vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison
MILN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.28%, less than GQGU's 0.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 0.96% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MILN Global X Millennial Consumer ETF | 0.28% | 0.25% | 0.22% | 0.33% | 0.24% | 0.15% | 0.21% | 0.43% | 0.43% | 0.89% | 0.32% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MILN and GQGU have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GQGU is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GQGU is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MILN.
GQGU has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.28% for MILN.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MILN and 0.49% for GQGU.
Find the right allocation for MILN and GQGU
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