QCLR vs. ACGR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QCLR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF) and ACGR (American Century Large Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QCLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Collar 95-110 Index, while ACGR is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QCLR returned 13.84%/yr vs 21.44%/yr for ACGR. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QCLR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ACGR.

Performance

QCLR vs. ACGR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) and American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCLR achieves a 1.40% return, which is significantly lower than ACGR's 7.39% return.

QCLR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.52%
• YTD: 1.40%
• 6M: -0.07%
• 1Y: 11.39%
• 3Y*: 13.84%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ACGR

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: 6.10%
• YTD: 7.39%
• 6M: 6.90%
• 1Y: 24.19%
• 3Y*: 21.44%
• 5Y*: 15.06%
• 10Y*: —

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

QCLR vs. ACGR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QCLR Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF	1.40%	11.27%	20.27%	28.87%	-18.87%	3.02%
ACGR American Century Large Cap Growth ETF	7.39%	14.50%	26.66%	43.24%	-30.13%	8.63%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLR and ACGR is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 27, 2021	0.84

The correlation between QCLR and ACGR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QCLR vs. ACGR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLR

QCLR Risk / Return Rank: 29
QCLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
QCLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
QCLR Omega Ratio Rank: 32
QCLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
QCLR Martin Ratio Rank: 28

ACGR

ACGR Risk / Return Rank: 40
ACGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
ACGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
ACGR Omega Ratio Rank: 43
ACGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
ACGR Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

QCLR vs. ACGR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) and American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR). 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.

	QCLR	ACGR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.17	1.57	-0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.60	2.17	-0.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.27	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.12	1.53	-0.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.02	5.20	-1.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QCLR vs. ACGR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLR Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is comparable to the ACGR Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLR and ACGR, 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

	QCLR	ACGR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.17	1.57	-0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.70	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.67	0.70	-0.03

Drawdowns

QCLR vs. ACGR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLR drawdown since its inception was -21.77%, smaller than the maximum ACGR drawdown of -34.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLR and ACGR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCLR	ACGR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.77%	-34.54%	+12.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.22%	-15.84%	+5.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.58%	-24.58%	+11.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.54%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.89%	-1.68%	+0.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.20%	-8.50%	+2.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.84%	4.66%	-1.82%

Volatility

QCLR vs. ACGR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) is 0.45%, while American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) has a volatility of 3.65%. This indicates that QCLR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACGR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCLR	ACGR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.45%	3.65%	-3.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.24%	11.95%	-4.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.82%	15.49%	-5.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.42%	21.51%	-9.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.42%	21.42%	-9.00%

QCLR vs. ACGR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ACGR's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCLR vs. ACGR - Dividend Comparison

QCLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.68%, more than ACGR's 0.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ACGR American Century Large Cap Growth ETF	0.09%	0.11%	0.23%	0.37%	0.48%	0.58%	1.44%
QCLR Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF	14.68%	14.89%	8.89%	0.47%	0.27%	1.64%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCLR and ACGR in my portfolio?

QCLR and ACGR have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QCLR or ACGR?

ACGR has higher volatility (3.65%) compared to QCLR (0.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLR dropped -21.77% vs ACGR's -34.54%.

Which ETF is better, QCLR or ACGR?

On 3-year performance, ACGR leads with 21.44% vs 13.84% for QCLR. On fees, ACGR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, QCLR has been the lower-risk option at 0.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCLR or ACGR?

Over the 3-year period, ACGR has performed better with a 21.44% return vs 13.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCLR or ACGR?

ACGR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QCLR or ACGR?

QCLR has the higher dividend yield at 14.68%, compared with 0.09% for ACGR.

What is the main difference between QCLR and ACGR?

QCLR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while ACGR is Large Cap Growth Equities. QCLR tracks NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Collar 95-110 Index, while ACGR tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and American Century. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLR and 0.39% for ACGR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACGR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 1.17), 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.