QLC vs. MTUM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QLC (FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund) and MTUM (iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index, while MTUM is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum SR Variant Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QLC returned 14.83%/yr vs 17.31%/yr for MTUM. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QLC charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for MTUM.

Performance

QLC vs. MTUM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QLC achieves a 11.39% return, which is significantly lower than MTUM's 31.75% return. Over the past 10 years, QLC has underperformed MTUM with an annualized return of 14.83%, while MTUM has yielded a comparatively higher 17.31% annualized return.

QLC

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: 5.38%
• YTD: 11.39%
• 6M: 11.88%
• 1Y: 33.09%
• 3Y*: 25.39%
• 5Y*: 15.29%
• 10Y*: 14.83%

MTUM

• 1D: 1.06%
• 1M: 15.90%
• YTD: 31.75%
• 6M: 32.38%
• 1Y: 41.76%
• 3Y*: 34.75%
• 5Y*: 15.21%
• 10Y*: 17.31%

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

QLC vs. MTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QLC FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund	11.39%	23.26%	26.71%	26.02%	-17.21%	28.46%	13.64%	24.51%	-8.12%	21.73%
MTUM iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF	31.75%	22.15%	32.89%	9.15%	-18.27%	13.36%	29.86%	27.25%	-1.67%	37.50%

Correlation

The correlation between QLC and MTUM is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2015	0.76

The correlation between QLC and MTUM shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (all time) to 0.88 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QLC vs. MTUM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QLC	MTUM
Technology	34.8%	44.4%
Financial Services	13.8%	10.4%
Communication Services	13.8%	7.4%
Healthcare	10.1%	6.9%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	3.6%
Industrials	6.6%	15.6%
Utilities	3.4%	1.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	3.3%
Real Estate	2.3%	1.8%
Basic Materials	2.2%	1.7%
Energy	2.0%	3.5%

Return for Risk

QLC vs. MTUM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QLC

QLC Risk / Return Rank: 81
QLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
QLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QLC Omega Ratio Rank: 80
QLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
QLC Martin Ratio Rank: 85

MTUM

MTUM Risk / Return Rank: 67
MTUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
MTUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
MTUM Omega Ratio Rank: 63
MTUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
MTUM Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

QLC vs. MTUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). 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.

	QLC	MTUM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.69	2.20	+0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	2.98	+0.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.39	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.76	3.64	+0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.59	14.50	+3.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QLC vs. MTUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLC Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is comparable to the MTUM Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLC and MTUM, 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

	QLC	MTUM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.69	2.20	+0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91	0.74	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.81	0.83	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.80	0.85	-0.05

Drawdowns

QLC vs. MTUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLC drawdown since its inception was -35.86%, which is greater than MTUM's maximum drawdown of -34.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLC and MTUM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QLC	MTUM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.86%	-34.08%	-1.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.84%	-11.54%	+2.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.49%	-20.99%	+2.50%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.81%	-32.28%	+8.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.86%	-34.08%	-1.78%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.74%	0.00%	-0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.54%	-6.21%	+1.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.89%	2.89%	-1.00%

Volatility

QLC vs. MTUM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) is 2.94%, while iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) has a volatility of 7.68%. This indicates that QLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QLC	MTUM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.94%	7.68%	-4.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.51%	16.46%	-6.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.38%	19.04%	-6.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.82%	20.60%	-3.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.42%	21.03%	-2.61%

QLC vs. MTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLC has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than MTUM's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

QLC vs. MTUM - Dividend Comparison

QLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, more than MTUM's 0.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MTUM iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF	0.60%	0.91%	0.75%	1.35%	1.80%	0.55%	0.83%	1.48%	1.27%	1.02%	1.43%	1.12%
QLC FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund	0.88%	0.94%	1.03%	1.26%	1.46%	0.96%	1.40%	1.91%	1.82%	1.29%	1.80%	0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QLC and MTUM in my portfolio?

QLC and MTUM have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QLC or MTUM?

MTUM has higher volatility (7.68%) compared to QLC (2.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLC dropped -35.86% vs MTUM's -34.08%.

Which ETF is better, QLC or MTUM?

On 10-year performance, MTUM leads with 17.31% vs 14.83% for QLC. On fees, MTUM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QLC has been the lower-risk option at 2.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QLC or MTUM?

Over the 10-year period, MTUM has performed better with a 17.31% return vs 14.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QLC or MTUM?

MTUM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for QLC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QLC or MTUM?

QLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.60% for MTUM.

What is the main difference between QLC and MTUM?

QLC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while MTUM is Momentum. QLC tracks Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index, while MTUM tracks MSCI USA Momentum SR Variant Index. They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for QLC and 0.15% for MTUM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 2.20), 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.