MOAT vs. QLTY

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MOAT (VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF) and QLTY (GMO U.S. Quality ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - MOAT tracks the Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index while QLTY tracks the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, MOAT returned 14.97% vs 27.39% for QLTY. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MOAT charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for QLTY.

Performance

MOAT vs. QLTY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) and GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MOAT achieves a -0.94% return, which is significantly lower than QLTY's 7.36% return.

MOAT

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: 3.30%
• YTD: -0.94%
• 6M: -0.69%
• 1Y: 14.97%
• 3Y*: 11.34%
• 5Y*: 8.01%
• 10Y*: 13.37%

QLTY

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 3.93%
• YTD: 7.36%
• 6M: 7.76%
• 1Y: 27.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MOAT vs. QLTY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF	-0.94%	13.20%	10.73%	10.90%
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF	7.36%	21.26%	21.02%	5.68%

Correlation

The correlation between MOAT and QLTY is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2023	0.76

The correlation between MOAT and QLTY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

MOAT vs. QLTY - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MOAT	QLTY
Technology	32.8%	36.5%
Consumer Defensive	17.5%	9.1%
Healthcare	16.0%	24.5%
Industrials	13.5%	3.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.3%	8.1%
Financial Services	6.7%	7.4%
Communication Services	2.4%	10.9%
Real Estate	0.8%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Energy	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MOAT vs. QLTY — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

MOAT

MOAT Risk / Return Rank: 27
MOAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
MOAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
MOAT Omega Ratio Rank: 27
MOAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
MOAT Martin Ratio Rank: 27

QLTY

QLTY Risk / Return Rank: 60
QLTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
QLTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
QLTY Omega Ratio Rank: 65
QLTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
QLTY Martin Ratio Rank: 55

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

MOAT vs. QLTY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) and GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY). 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.

	MOAT	QLTY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	2.24	-1.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.64	3.19	-1.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.40	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.21	2.35	-1.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.77	9.59	-5.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MOAT vs. QLTY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MOAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the QLTY Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MOAT and QLTY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MOAT	QLTY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.09	2.24	-1.16
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.72	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	1.53	-0.76

Drawdowns

MOAT vs. QLTY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MOAT drawdown since its inception was -33.31%, which is greater than QLTY's maximum drawdown of -17.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOAT and QLTY.

Drawdown Indicators

	MOAT	QLTY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.31%	-17.00%	-16.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.43%	-11.71%	-0.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.44%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.96%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.72%	-0.72%	-4.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.83%	-2.05%	-1.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.98%	2.86%	+1.12%

Volatility

MOAT vs. QLTY - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) has a higher volatility of 3.82% compared to GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) at 2.64%. This indicates that MOAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QLTY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MOAT	QLTY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.82%	2.64%	+1.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.87%	9.21%	+0.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.86%	12.26%	+1.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.18%	14.64%	+3.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.68%	14.64%	+4.04%

MOAT vs. QLTY - Expense Ratio Comparison

MOAT has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than QLTY's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

MOAT vs. QLTY - Dividend Comparison

MOAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, more than QLTY's 0.71% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF	1.37%	1.36%	1.37%	0.86%	1.25%	1.08%	1.46%	1.31%	1.79%	1.07%	1.17%	2.13%
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF	0.71%	0.73%	0.79%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MOAT and QLTY in my portfolio?

MOAT and QLTY have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MOAT or QLTY?

MOAT has higher volatility (3.82%) compared to QLTY (2.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOAT dropped -33.31% vs QLTY's -17.00%.

Which ETF is better, MOAT or QLTY?

On 1-year performance, QLTY leads with 27.39% vs 14.97% for MOAT. On fees, MOAT is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, QLTY has been the lower-risk option at 2.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MOAT or QLTY?

Over the 1-year period, QLTY has performed better with a 27.39% return vs 14.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MOAT or QLTY?

MOAT is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for QLTY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MOAT or QLTY?

MOAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.37%, compared with 0.71% for QLTY.

What is the main difference between MOAT and QLTY?

MOAT tracks Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index, while QLTY tracks S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and GMO. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for MOAT and 0.50% for QLTY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLTY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.09), 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.