QDEF vs. QLV
QDEF (FlexShares Quality Dividend Defensive Index Fund) and QLV (FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund) are both Quality Factor funds - QDEF tracks the Northern Trust Quality Dividend Defensive Index while QLV tracks the Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QDEF returned 12.34%/yr vs 9.98%/yr for QLV. Their correlation of 0.93 means they have usually moved in the same direction. QDEF charges 0.37%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for QLV.
Performance
QDEF vs. QLV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QDEF achieves a 10.48% return, which is significantly higher than QLV's 9.01% return.
QDEF
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 1.68%
- 6M
- 8.64%
- YTD
- 10.48%
- 1Y
- 20.97%
- 3Y*
- 17.66%
- 5Y*
- 12.34%
- 10Y*
- 12.14%
- ALL TIME*
- 12.72%
QLV
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 1.40%
- 6M
- 6.81%
- YTD
- 9.01%
- 1Y
- 16.12%
- 3Y*
- 14.76%
- 5Y*
- 9.98%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 11.61%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $546.87K | $522.47K | $732.31K | |
| $433.57K | $400.63K | $648.84K |
QDEF vs. QLV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QDEF FlexShares Quality Dividend Defensive Index Fund | 10.48% | 17.43% | 21.19% | 17.48% | -10.94% | 26.04% | 3.15% | 6.13% |
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund | 9.01% | 12.28% | 18.08% | 13.71% | -9.97% | 26.08% | 9.63% | 5.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between QDEF and QLV is 0.82, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2019 | 0.93 |
The correlation between QDEF and QLV shifts across timeframes, from 0.82 (1 year) to 0.93 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
QDEF vs. QLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QDEF
QLV
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Industrials
Energy
Real Estate
Utilities
Basic Materials
Technology
QDEF
QLV
Financial Services
QDEF
QLV
Healthcare
QDEF
QLV
Consumer Defensive
QDEF
QLV
Consumer Cyclical
QDEF
QLV
Communication Services
QDEF
QLV
Industrials
QDEF
QLV
Energy
QDEF
QLV
Real Estate
QDEF
QLV
Utilities
QDEF
QLV
Basic Materials
QDEF
QLV
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
QDEF vs. QLV — Risk / Return Rank
QDEF
QLV
QDEF vs. QLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares Quality Dividend Defensive Index Fund (QDEF) and FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV). 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.
| QDEF | QLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.36 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.93 | 2.53 | +0.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.20 | 10.43 | +1.77 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QDEF vs. QLV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QDEF drawdown since its inception was -35.74%, which is greater than QLV's maximum drawdown of -33.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDEF and QLV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QDEF | QLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.74% | -33.71% | -2.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.95% | -6.19% | -0.76% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.43% | -12.05% | -2.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.37% | -17.93% | -3.44% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.74% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.58% | -0.43% | -0.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.27% | -3.93% | +0.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.67% | 1.50% | +0.17% |
Volatility
QDEF vs. QLV - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FlexShares Quality Dividend Defensive Index Fund (QDEF) is 2.29%, while FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) has a volatility of 2.64%. This indicates that QDEF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QDEF | QLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.29% | 2.64% | -0.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.47% | 5.96% | +1.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.85% | 7.88% | +1.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.77% | 12.63% | +1.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.14% | 16.43% | -0.29% |
QDEF vs. QLV - Expense Ratio Comparison
QDEF has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is higher than QLV's 0.22% expense ratio.
Dividends
QDEF vs. QLV - Dividend Comparison
QDEF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.58%, more than QLV's 1.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QDEF FlexShares Quality Dividend Defensive Index Fund | 1.58% | 1.74% | 1.85% | 2.21% | 2.42% | 1.84% | 2.50% | 3.17% | 7.10% | 2.70% | 2.90% | 3.00% |
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund | 1.52% | 1.60% | 1.66% | 1.60% | 1.74% | 0.96% | 1.24% | 0.58% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QDEF and QLV have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QLV has higher volatility (2.64%) compared to QDEF (2.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDEF dropped -35.74% vs QLV's -33.71%.
On 5-year performance, QDEF leads with 12.34% vs 9.98% for QLV. On fees, QLV is cheaper at 0.22% per year. On volatility, QDEF has been the lower-risk option at 2.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QDEF has performed better with a 12.34% return vs 9.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QLV is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.37% for QDEF.
QDEF has the higher dividend yield at 1.58%, compared with 1.52% for QLV.
QDEF tracks Northern Trust Quality Dividend Defensive Index, while QLV tracks Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility Index. They also come from different issuers: FlexShares and Northern Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for QDEF and 0.22% for QLV.
QDEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.99), 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 QDEF and QLV
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