QGRPX vs. CTCAX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QGRPX (UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund) and CTCAX (Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A) are both mutual funds - QGRPX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by UBS, while CTCAX is a Technology Equities fund managed by Columbia. Over the past 5 years, QGRPX returned 12.43%/yr vs 20.96%/yr for CTCAX. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QGRPX charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.18%/yr for CTCAX.

Performance

QGRPX vs. CTCAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund (QGRPX) and Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A (CTCAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QGRPX achieves a 4.11% return, which is significantly lower than CTCAX's 32.06% return.

QGRPX

• 1D: -0.61%
• 1M: 5.18%
• YTD: 4.11%
• 6M: 3.50%
• 1Y: 17.94%
• 3Y*: 20.49%
• 5Y*: 12.43%
• 10Y*: —

CTCAX

• 1D: 1.47%
• 1M: 17.00%
• YTD: 32.06%
• 6M: 31.15%
• 1Y: 61.81%
• 3Y*: 36.07%
• 5Y*: 20.96%
• 10Y*: 24.75%

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

QGRPX vs. CTCAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QGRPX UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund	4.11%	15.51%	25.13%	35.52%	-25.57%	29.14%	14.62%
CTCAX Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A	32.06%	24.78%	31.39%	56.46%	-34.81%	22.73%	23.15%

Correlation

The correlation between QGRPX and CTCAX is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2020	0.90

The correlation between QGRPX and CTCAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QGRPX vs. CTCAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

QGRPX

QGRPX Risk / Return Rank: 19
QGRPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
QGRPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
QGRPX Omega Ratio Rank: 22
QGRPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
QGRPX Martin Ratio Rank: 12

CTCAX

CTCAX Risk / Return Rank: 83
CTCAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
CTCAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
CTCAX Omega Ratio Rank: 74
CTCAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
CTCAX Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

QGRPX vs. CTCAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund (QGRPX) and Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A (CTCAX). 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.

	QGRPX	CTCAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.39	3.04	-1.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.99	3.68	-1.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.49	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.16	4.43	-3.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.68	16.56	-12.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QGRPX vs. CTCAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QGRPX Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is lower than the CTCAX Sharpe Ratio of 3.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QGRPX and CTCAX, 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

	QGRPX	CTCAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.39	3.04	-1.65
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65	0.81	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.00	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	0.78	0.00

Drawdowns

QGRPX vs. CTCAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QGRPX drawdown since its inception was -30.28%, smaller than the maximum CTCAX drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QGRPX and CTCAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	QGRPX	CTCAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.28%	-61.04%	+30.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.45%	-14.43%	-3.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.03%	-26.67%	+5.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.28%	-39.55%	+9.27%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.55%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.61%	0.00%	-0.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.56%	-10.68%	+3.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.29%	3.86%	+1.43%

Volatility

QGRPX vs. CTCAX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund (QGRPX) is 3.16%, while Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A (CTCAX) has a volatility of 6.37%. This indicates that QGRPX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CTCAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QGRPX	CTCAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.16%	6.37%	-3.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.75%	16.72%	-4.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.54%	21.06%	-6.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.60%	25.98%	-6.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.29%	24.84%	-5.55%

QGRPX vs. CTCAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

QGRPX has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CTCAX's 1.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

QGRPX vs. CTCAX - Dividend Comparison

QGRPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.92%, more than CTCAX's 2.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CTCAX Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A	2.49%	3.29%	1.08%	2.36%	3.53%	4.15%	0.91%	2.55%	5.82%	3.52%	0.36%	1.80%
QGRPX UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund	5.92%	6.16%	3.62%	0.42%	1.00%	2.84%	0.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QGRPX and CTCAX in my portfolio?

QGRPX and CTCAX have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QGRPX or CTCAX?

CTCAX has higher volatility (6.37%) compared to QGRPX (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QGRPX dropped -30.28% vs CTCAX's -61.04%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CTCAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.04 vs 1.39), 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.