QILGX vs. CTCAX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QILGX (Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund) and CTCAX (Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A) are both mutual funds - QILGX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Federated, while CTCAX is a Technology Equities fund managed by Columbia. Over the past 10 years, QILGX returned 20.20%/yr vs 24.65%/yr for CTCAX. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QILGX charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.18%/yr for CTCAX.

Performance

QILGX vs. CTCAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund (QILGX) 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, QILGX achieves a 8.43% return, which is significantly lower than CTCAX's 30.99% return. Over the past 10 years, QILGX has underperformed CTCAX with an annualized return of 20.20%, while CTCAX has yielded a comparatively higher 24.65% annualized return.

QILGX

• 1D: -0.90%
• 1M: 5.44%
• YTD: 8.43%
• 6M: 9.68%
• 1Y: 25.74%
• 3Y*: 28.18%
• 5Y*: 18.49%
• 10Y*: 20.20%

CTCAX

• 1D: -0.81%
• 1M: 14.21%
• YTD: 30.99%
• 6M: 29.92%
• 1Y: 59.47%
• 3Y*: 35.71%
• 5Y*: 20.33%
• 10Y*: 24.65%

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

QILGX vs. CTCAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QILGX Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund	8.43%	19.46%	40.83%	39.63%	-24.86%	30.46%	38.39%	32.01%	1.52%	25.42%
CTCAX Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A	30.99%	24.78%	31.39%	56.46%	-34.81%	22.73%	49.46%	43.91%	-1.48%	42.99%

Correlation

The correlation between QILGX and CTCAX is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.77
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2006	0.87

Over the past year, the correlation between QILGX and CTCAX has dropped to 0.32 - well below their long-term average of 0.87, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

QILGX vs. CTCAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

QILGX

QILGX Risk / Return Rank: 30
QILGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
QILGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
QILGX Omega Ratio Rank: 40
QILGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
QILGX Martin Ratio Rank: 22

CTCAX

CTCAX Risk / Return Rank: 80
CTCAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
CTCAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
CTCAX Omega Ratio Rank: 70
CTCAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
CTCAX Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

QILGX vs. CTCAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund (QILGX) 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.

	QILGX	CTCAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.67	2.89	-1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.35	3.54	-1.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.47	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.72	4.21	-2.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.55	15.74	-10.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QILGX vs. CTCAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QILGX Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is lower than the CTCAX Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QILGX 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

	QILGX	CTCAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.67	2.89	-1.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88	0.79	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.95	1.00	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.60	0.77	-0.17

Drawdowns

QILGX vs. CTCAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QILGX drawdown since its inception was -53.48%, smaller than the maximum CTCAX drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QILGX and CTCAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	QILGX	CTCAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.48%	-61.04%	+7.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.55%	-14.43%	-1.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.71%	-26.67%	+1.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.05%	-39.55%	+9.50%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.68%	-39.55%	+7.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.19%	-0.81%	-0.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.96%	-10.68%	+1.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.83%	3.86%	+0.97%

Volatility

QILGX vs. CTCAX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund (QILGX) is 3.38%, while Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A (CTCAX) has a volatility of 6.55%. This indicates that QILGX 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

	QILGX	CTCAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.38%	6.55%	-3.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.04%	16.74%	-3.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.04%	21.07%	-5.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.05%	25.98%	-4.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.25%	24.84%	-3.59%

QILGX vs. CTCAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

QILGX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than CTCAX's 1.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

QILGX vs. CTCAX - Dividend Comparison

QILGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.85%, more than CTCAX's 2.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CTCAX Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A	2.51%	3.29%	1.08%	2.36%	3.53%	4.15%	0.91%	2.55%	5.82%	3.52%	0.36%	1.80%
QILGX Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth Fund	2.85%	3.09%	6.60%	1.47%	13.57%	19.44%	7.47%	5.07%	10.33%	7.40%	0.55%	11.76%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QILGX and CTCAX in my portfolio?

QILGX and CTCAX have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QILGX or CTCAX?

CTCAX has higher volatility (6.55%) compared to QILGX (3.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QILGX dropped -53.48% vs CTCAX's -61.04%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CTCAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.89 vs 1.67), 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.