QCLGX vs. EFCNX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QCLGX (Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund Class C) and EFCNX (Emerald Insights Fund) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, QCLGX returned 19.29%/yr vs 16.46%/yr for EFCNX. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QCLGX charges 1.79%/yr vs 1.40%/yr for EFCNX.

Performance

QCLGX vs. EFCNX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund Class C (QCLGX) and Emerald Insights Fund (EFCNX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

Over the past 10 years, QCLGX has outperformed EFCNX with an annualized return of 19.29%, while EFCNX has yielded a comparatively lower 16.46% annualized return.

QCLGX

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 6.87%
• YTD: 8.93%
• 6M: 10.45%
• 1Y: 26.66%
• 3Y*: 27.97%
• 5Y*: 18.18%
• 10Y*: 19.29%

EFCNX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 0.00%
• 6M: 0.00%
• 1Y: 27.55%
• 3Y*: 21.89%
• 5Y*: 10.91%
• 10Y*: 16.46%

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

QCLGX vs. EFCNX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QCLGX Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund Class C	8.93%	18.29%	41.71%	38.26%	-25.69%	29.19%	37.06%	30.69%	0.46%	24.22%
EFCNX Emerald Insights Fund	0.00%	28.71%	25.88%	40.82%	-31.09%	22.95%	49.60%	36.32%	-9.88%	22.52%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLGX and EFCNX is 0.01, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.01
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2014	0.83

Over the past year, the correlation between QCLGX and EFCNX has dropped to 0.01 - well below their long-term average of 0.83, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

QCLGX vs. EFCNX — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLGX

QCLGX Risk / Return Rank: 26
QCLGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
QCLGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
QCLGX Omega Ratio Rank: 39
QCLGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
QCLGX Martin Ratio Rank: 17

EFCNX

EFCNX Risk / Return Rank: 99
EFCNX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
EFCNX Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
EFCNX Omega Ratio Rank: 99
EFCNX Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
EFCNX Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

QCLGX vs. EFCNX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund Class C (QCLGX) and Emerald Insights Fund (EFCNX). 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.

	QCLGX	EFCNX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	3.86	-2.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.15	6.20	-4.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	2.65	-1.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.56	12.23	-10.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.66	70.23	-65.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QCLGX vs. EFCNX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLGX Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is lower than the EFCNX Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLGX and EFCNX, 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

	QCLGX	EFCNX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.55	3.86	-2.31
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84	0.50	+0.35
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.89	0.74	+0.16
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.55	0.63	-0.08

Drawdowns

QCLGX vs. EFCNX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLGX drawdown since its inception was -54.01%, which is greater than EFCNX's maximum drawdown of -38.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLGX and EFCNX.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCLGX	EFCNX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.01%	-38.34%	-15.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.11%	-2.90%	-14.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.07%	-27.61%	+1.54%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.35%	-38.34%	+7.99%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.79%	-38.34%	+6.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.33%	0.00%	-0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.79%	-8.64%	-1.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.74%	0.94%	+4.80%

Volatility

QCLGX vs. EFCNX - Volatility Comparison

Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund Class C (QCLGX) has a higher volatility of 3.20% compared to Emerald Insights Fund (EFCNX) at 0.00%. This indicates that QCLGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFCNX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCLGX	EFCNX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.20%	0.00%	+3.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.52%	0.00%	+14.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.25%	9.27%	+7.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.62%	22.89%	-1.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.69%	22.80%	-1.11%

QCLGX vs. EFCNX - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLGX has a 1.79% expense ratio, which is higher than EFCNX's 1.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCLGX vs. EFCNX - Dividend Comparison

QCLGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.33%, less than EFCNX's 8.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EFCNX Emerald Insights Fund	8.50%	8.50%	1.27%	0.00%	5.41%	15.80%	9.41%	0.04%	27.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QCLGX Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund Class C	4.33%	4.72%	9.81%	2.11%	19.37%	26.17%	9.41%	6.20%	12.38%	8.63%	0.63%	13.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCLGX and EFCNX in my portfolio?

QCLGX and EFCNX have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QCLGX or EFCNX?

QCLGX has higher volatility (3.20%) compared to EFCNX (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLGX dropped -54.01% vs EFCNX's -38.34%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFCNX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 1.55), 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.