PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QABA vs. XLF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QABA vs. XLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QABA achieves a 8.16% return, which is significantly higher than XLF's -6.64% return. Over the past 10 years, QABA has underperformed XLF with an annualized return of 6.80%, while XLF has yielded a comparatively higher 12.38% annualized return.


QABA

1D
-2.39%
1M
-0.32%
YTD
8.16%
6M
7.37%
1Y
18.48%
3Y*
17.46%
5Y*
3.09%
10Y*
6.80%

XLF

1D
-1.15%
1M
-1.38%
YTD
-6.64%
6M
-4.18%
1Y
1.13%
3Y*
17.64%
5Y*
7.61%
10Y*
12.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QABA vs. XLF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QABA
First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund
8.16%4.62%14.49%-2.18%-9.01%34.20%-10.70%22.85%-16.47%0.75%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
-6.64%14.90%30.56%12.03%-10.59%34.80%-1.74%31.88%-13.06%22.00%

Correlation

The correlation between QABA and XLF is 0.65, 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

0.65

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.69

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.74

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2009

0.78

The correlation between QABA and XLF shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (1 year) to 0.78 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QABA vs. XLF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QABA
XLF

Financial Services

99.7%
98.0%

Industrials

0.3%
0.2%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

1.8%

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

QABA
99.7%
XLF
98.0%

Industrials

QABA
0.3%
XLF
0.2%

Basic Materials

QABA

-

XLF

-

Communication Services

QABA

-

XLF

-

Consumer Cyclical

QABA

-

XLF

-

Consumer Defensive

QABA

-

XLF

-

Energy

QABA

-

XLF

-

Healthcare

QABA

-

XLF

-

Real Estate

QABA

-

XLF

-

Technology

QABA

-

XLF
1.8%

Utilities

QABA

-

XLF

-

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. XLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QABA
QABA Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
QABA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QABA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
QABA Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
QABA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
QABA Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

XLF
XLF Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QABA vs. XLF - 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 State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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.


QABAXLFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.75

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

1.02

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.49

0.08

+1.41

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.69

0.20

+3.49

QABA vs. XLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QABA Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is higher than the XLF Sharpe Ratio of 0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QABA and XLF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QABAXLFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.83

0.08

+0.75

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

0.41

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.24

0.56

-0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.34

0.20

+0.14

Drawdowns

QABA vs. XLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QABA drawdown since its inception was -49.30%, smaller than the maximum XLF drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QABA and XLF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QABAXLFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.30%

-82.69%

+33.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.49%

-14.79%

+2.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.82%

-15.54%

-10.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.93%

-25.81%

-17.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.30%

-42.86%

-6.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.25%

-9.34%

+5.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.43%

-20.03%

+8.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.02%

5.66%

-0.64%

Volatility

QABA vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) has a higher volatility of 5.63% compared to State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) at 3.29%. This indicates that QABA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QABAXLFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.63%

3.29%

+2.34%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.22%

10.94%

+4.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.50%

14.41%

+8.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.50%

18.63%

+7.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.69%

22.16%

+6.53%

QABA vs. XLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QABA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XLF's 0.08% expense ratio.


Dividends

QABA vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison

QABA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, more than XLF's 1.56% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QABA
First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund
2.40%2.52%2.37%2.71%2.10%1.68%2.55%1.95%1.90%1.42%1.13%1.39%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
1.56%1.31%1.42%1.71%2.04%1.63%2.03%1.87%2.08%1.48%21.10%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


QABA and XLF have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QABA has higher volatility (5.63%) compared to XLF (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QABA dropped -49.30% vs XLF's -82.69%.

On 10-year performance, XLF leads with 12.38% vs 6.80% for QABA. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XLF has performed better with a 12.38% return vs 6.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QABA.

QABA has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 1.56% for XLF.

QABA tracks NASDAQ OMX ABA Community Bank Index, while XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QABA and 0.08% for XLF.

QABA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.83 vs 0.08), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QABA and XLF

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