QABA vs. GPZ
QABA (First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund) and GPZ (VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF) are both Financials Equities funds - QABA tracks the NASDAQ OMX ABA Community Bank Index while GPZ tracks the MarketVector Alternative Asset Managers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, QABA returned 26.59% vs -11.53% for GPZ. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QABA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for GPZ.
Performance
QABA vs. GPZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QABA achieves a 16.85% return, which is significantly higher than GPZ's -19.30% return.
QABA
- 1D
- 1.68%
- 1M
- 5.99%
- YTD
- 16.85%
- 6M
- 13.71%
- 1Y
- 26.59%
- 3Y*
- 22.25%
- 5Y*
- 5.53%
- 10Y*
- 8.33%
GPZ
- 1D
- -2.58%
- 1M
- -5.07%
- YTD
- -19.30%
- 6M
- -20.44%
- 1Y
- -11.53%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QABA vs. GPZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QABA First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund | 16.85% | 11.04% |
GPZ VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF | -19.30% | 9.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between QABA and GPZ is 0.54, 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 | 0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025 | 0.54 |
The correlation between QABA and GPZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.
QABA vs. GPZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QABA
GPZ
Financial Services
Industrials
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
QABA
GPZ
Industrials
QABA
GPZ
-
Basic Materials
QABA
-
GPZ
-
Communication Services
QABA
-
GPZ
-
Consumer Cyclical
QABA
-
GPZ
-
Consumer Defensive
QABA
-
GPZ
-
Energy
QABA
-
GPZ
-
Healthcare
QABA
-
GPZ
-
Real Estate
QABA
-
GPZ
Technology
QABA
-
GPZ
-
Utilities
QABA
-
GPZ
-
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
QABA vs. GPZ — Risk / Return Rank
QABA
GPZ
QABA vs. GPZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) and VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF (GPZ). 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.
| QABA | GPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 0.95 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.14 | -0.36 | +2.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.34 | -0.73 | +6.07 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QABA vs. GPZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QABA drawdown since its inception was -49.30%, which is greater than GPZ's maximum drawdown of -31.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QABA and GPZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QABA | GPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.30% | -31.72% | -17.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.49% | -31.72% | +19.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.82% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.93% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -49.30% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -25.87% | +25.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.40% | -12.27% | +0.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.99% | 15.80% | -10.81% |
Volatility
QABA vs. GPZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) is 6.08%, while VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF (GPZ) has a volatility of 9.25%. This indicates that QABA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GPZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QABA | GPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.08% | 9.25% | -3.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.48% | 22.33% | -6.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.55% | 27.85% | -5.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.39% | 27.60% | -1.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.64% | 27.60% | +1.04% |
QABA vs. GPZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
QABA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than GPZ's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
QABA vs. GPZ - Dividend Comparison
QABA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.22%, more than GPZ's 1.03% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GPZ VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF | 1.03% | 0.83% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QABA First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund | 2.22% | 2.52% | 2.37% | 2.71% | 2.10% | 1.68% | 2.55% | 1.95% | 1.90% | 1.42% | 1.13% | 1.39% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QABA and GPZ have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GPZ has higher volatility (9.25%) compared to QABA (6.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QABA dropped -49.30% vs GPZ's -31.72%.
On 1-year performance, QABA leads with 26.59% vs -11.53% for GPZ. On fees, GPZ is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, QABA has been the lower-risk option at 6.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QABA has performed better with a 26.59% return vs -11.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GPZ is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QABA.
QABA has the higher dividend yield at 2.22%, compared with 1.03% for GPZ.
QABA tracks NASDAQ OMX ABA Community Bank Index, while GPZ tracks MarketVector Alternative Asset Managers Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QABA and 0.40% for GPZ.
QABA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs -0.42), 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 QABA and GPZ
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