PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QEFA vs. FICS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QEFA vs. FICS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) and First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QEFA achieves a 6.80% return, which is significantly higher than FICS's 0.83% return.


QEFA

1D
-0.49%
1M
1.69%
YTD
6.80%
6M
8.78%
1Y
17.29%
3Y*
14.76%
5Y*
7.62%
10Y*
8.67%

FICS

1D
-0.83%
1M
1.05%
YTD
0.83%
6M
3.51%
1Y
3.46%
3Y*
9.67%
5Y*
4.92%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QEFA vs. FICS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
QEFA
SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF
6.80%29.25%2.27%17.40%-14.03%12.50%0.77%
FICS
First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF
0.83%20.44%2.59%18.07%-19.47%19.78%2.20%

Correlation

The correlation between QEFA and FICS is 0.86, 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

0.86

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

0.89

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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 17, 2020

0.85

The correlation between QEFA and FICS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

QEFA vs. FICS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QEFA
FICS

Financial Services

14.3%
28.5%

Healthcare

11.6%
9.7%

Technology

10.1%
1.8%

Industrials

8.7%
27.8%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
10.0%

Energy

5.1%
3.1%

Basic Materials

4.9%
4.0%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
14.2%

Communication Services

3.3%
4.0%

Utilities

2.7%

-

Real Estate

1.8%

-

Financial Services

QEFA
14.3%
FICS
28.5%

Healthcare

QEFA
11.6%
FICS
9.7%

Technology

QEFA
10.1%
FICS
1.8%

Industrials

QEFA
8.7%
FICS
27.8%

Consumer Cyclical

QEFA
5.7%
FICS
10.0%

Energy

QEFA
5.1%
FICS
3.1%

Basic Materials

QEFA
4.9%
FICS
4.0%

Consumer Defensive

QEFA
4.2%
FICS
14.2%

Communication Services

QEFA
3.3%
FICS
4.0%

Utilities

QEFA
2.7%
FICS

-

Real Estate

QEFA
1.8%
FICS

-

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

QEFA vs. FICS — Risk / Return Rank

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

QEFA
QEFA Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
QEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
QEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
QEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
QEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank

FICS
FICS Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
FICS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FICS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
FICS Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
FICS Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
FICS Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
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.

QEFA vs. FICS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) and First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS). 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.


QEFAFICSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.06

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.81

0.34

+1.48

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.52

0.97

+5.56

QEFA vs. FICS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QEFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is higher than the FICS Sharpe Ratio of 0.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QEFA and FICS, 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


QEFAFICSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.37

0.26

+1.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

0.29

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.54

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.42

+0.01

Drawdowns

QEFA vs. FICS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QEFA drawdown since its inception was -31.71%, which is greater than FICS's maximum drawdown of -29.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QEFA and FICS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QEFAFICSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.71%

-29.16%

-2.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.58%

-10.32%

+0.74%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.23%

-11.66%

-0.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.09%

-29.16%

+1.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.93%

-4.79%

+1.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.08%

-7.21%

+1.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.66%

3.60%

-0.94%

Volatility

QEFA vs. FICS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) is 3.94%, while First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that QEFA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FICS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QEFAFICSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.94%

4.53%

-0.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.25%

10.73%

-0.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.76%

13.26%

-0.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.77%

17.20%

-2.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.03%

16.94%

-0.91%

QEFA vs. FICS - Expense Ratio Comparison

QEFA has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than FICS's 0.70% expense ratio.


Dividends

QEFA vs. FICS - Dividend Comparison

QEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.87%, more than FICS's 1.96% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FICS
First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF
1.96%1.85%2.01%1.02%1.89%1.26%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QEFA
SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF
2.87%3.13%3.17%2.79%3.02%2.37%1.82%2.95%3.22%2.33%2.01%2.94%

Frequently Asked Questions


QEFA and FICS have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FICS has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to QEFA (3.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QEFA dropped -31.71% vs FICS's -29.16%.

On 5-year performance, QEFA leads with 7.62% vs 4.92% for FICS. On fees, QEFA is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, QEFA has been the lower-risk option at 3.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QEFA has performed better with a 7.62% return vs 4.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QEFA is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FICS.

QEFA has the higher dividend yield at 2.87%, compared with 1.96% for FICS.

QEFA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while FICS is Global Equities. QEFA tracks MSCI EAFE Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while FICS tracks The International Developed Capital Strength Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for QEFA and 0.70% for FICS.

QEFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.26), 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 QEFA and FICS

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