PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QDF vs. SMH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QDF vs. SMH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDF achieves a 10.70% return, which is significantly lower than SMH's 77.13% return. Over the past 10 years, QDF has underperformed SMH with an annualized return of 12.18%, while SMH has yielded a comparatively higher 37.68% annualized return.


QDF

1D
-0.56%
1M
4.60%
YTD
10.70%
6M
10.82%
1Y
27.64%
3Y*
19.21%
5Y*
11.90%
10Y*
12.18%

SMH

1D
0.90%
1M
25.87%
YTD
77.13%
6M
75.61%
1Y
157.20%
3Y*
64.17%
5Y*
39.21%
10Y*
37.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QDF vs. SMH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QDF
FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund
10.70%16.58%16.95%19.71%-12.13%26.65%4.86%25.71%-7.97%17.42%
SMH
VanEck Semiconductor ETF
77.13%49.17%39.10%73.38%-33.53%42.13%55.53%64.45%-9.05%38.48%

Correlation

The correlation between QDF and SMH is 0.70, 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

0.70

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

0.70

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

0.73

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2012

0.71

The correlation between QDF and SMH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

QDF vs. SMH - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QDF
SMH

Technology

38.3%
100.0%

Financial Services

13.2%

-

Industrials

8.9%

-

Healthcare

8.3%

-

Consumer Cyclical

6.9%

-

Communication Services

6.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

5.5%

-

Real Estate

5.4%

-

Utilities

2.1%

-

Basic Materials

1.6%

-

Energy

0.9%

-

Technology

QDF
38.3%
SMH
100.0%

Financial Services

QDF
13.2%
SMH

-

Industrials

QDF
8.9%
SMH

-

Healthcare

QDF
8.3%
SMH

-

Consumer Cyclical

QDF
6.9%
SMH

-

Communication Services

QDF
6.8%
SMH

-

Consumer Defensive

QDF
5.5%
SMH

-

Real Estate

QDF
5.4%
SMH

-

Utilities

QDF
2.1%
SMH

-

Basic Materials

QDF
1.6%
SMH

-

Energy

QDF
0.9%
SMH

-

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

QDF vs. SMH — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDF
QDF Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
QDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDF Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
QDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDF Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

SMH
SMH Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
SMH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SMH Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
SMH Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
SMH Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
SMH Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

QDF vs. SMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). 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.


QDFSMHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.79

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.72

-0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.52

10.59

-7.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.37

40.63

-25.25

QDF vs. SMH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is lower than the SMH Sharpe Ratio of 5.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDF and SMH, 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


QDFSMHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.40

5.19

-2.79

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

1.13

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.70

1.16

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.78

0.34

+0.44

Drawdowns

QDF vs. SMH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDF drawdown since its inception was -36.67%, smaller than the maximum SMH drawdown of -84.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDF and SMH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QDFSMHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.67%

-84.96%

+48.29%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.90%

-14.93%

+7.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.01%

-35.74%

+17.73%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.06%

-45.30%

+23.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.67%

-45.30%

+8.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.56%

0.00%

-0.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.65%

-41.09%

+37.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.80%

3.89%

-2.09%

Volatility

QDF vs. SMH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) is 2.95%, while VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a volatility of 11.47%. This indicates that QDF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QDFSMHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.95%

11.47%

-8.52%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.76%

24.29%

-15.53%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.60%

30.56%

-18.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.60%

35.01%

-19.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.39%

32.57%

-15.18%

QDF vs. SMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDF has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is higher than SMH's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

QDF vs. SMH - Dividend Comparison

QDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, more than SMH's 0.17% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QDF
FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund
1.50%1.65%1.93%2.19%2.45%1.90%2.38%3.05%4.29%2.70%3.07%3.04%
SMH
VanEck Semiconductor ETF
0.17%0.31%0.44%0.60%1.18%0.51%0.69%1.50%1.88%1.43%0.80%2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


QDF and SMH have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SMH has higher volatility (11.47%) compared to QDF (2.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDF dropped -36.67% vs SMH's -84.96%.

On 10-year performance, SMH leads with 37.68% vs 12.18% for QDF. On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, QDF has been the lower-risk option at 2.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SMH has performed better with a 37.68% return vs 12.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.37% for QDF.

QDF has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 0.17% for SMH.

QDF is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while SMH is Semiconductors. QDF tracks Northern Trust Quality Dividend Index, while SMH tracks MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. They also come from different issuers: FlexShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for QDF and 0.35% for SMH.

SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.19 vs 2.40), 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 QDF and SMH

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