PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QLC vs. OUSA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QLC vs. OUSA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QLC achieves a 15.68% return, which is significantly higher than OUSA's 8.45% return. Over the past 10 years, QLC has outperformed OUSA with an annualized return of 14.87%, while OUSA has yielded a comparatively lower 10.54% annualized return.


QLC

1D
1.86%
1M
3.97%
6M
14.01%
YTD
15.68%
1Y
29.86%
3Y*
24.86%
5Y*
15.04%
10Y*
14.87%
ALL TIME*
14.63%

OUSA

1D
1.27%
1M
3.71%
6M
5.67%
YTD
8.45%
1Y
16.10%
3Y*
14.04%
5Y*
9.18%
10Y*
10.54%
ALL TIME*
10.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$880.04K$1.30M$1.44M
$3.27M$4.10M$3.64M

QLC vs. OUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QLC
FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund
15.68%23.26%26.71%26.02%-17.21%28.46%13.64%24.51%-8.12%21.73%
OUSA
OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF
8.45%10.23%17.09%13.44%-9.33%23.75%6.96%25.03%-3.11%18.81%

Correlation

The correlation between QLC and OUSA is 0.55, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.55

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.73

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.81

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2015

0.77

Over the past year, the correlation between QLC and OUSA has dropped to 0.55 - well below their long-term average of 0.77, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

QLC vs. OUSA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QLC
OUSA

Technology

38.0%
23.7%

Financial Services

13.6%
18.6%

Communication Services

10.2%
10.3%

Healthcare

10.0%
15.1%

Consumer Cyclical

7.2%
13.1%

Industrials

5.8%
11.9%

Utilities

3.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
7.4%

Real Estate

2.8%

-

Energy

2.3%

-

Basic Materials

2.1%

-

Technology

QLC
38.0%
OUSA
23.7%

Financial Services

QLC
13.6%
OUSA
18.6%

Communication Services

QLC
10.2%
OUSA
10.3%

Healthcare

QLC
10.0%
OUSA
15.1%

Consumer Cyclical

QLC
7.2%
OUSA
13.1%

Industrials

QLC
5.8%
OUSA
11.9%

Utilities

QLC
3.8%
OUSA

-

Consumer Defensive

QLC
3.5%
OUSA
7.4%

Real Estate

QLC
2.8%
OUSA

-

Energy

QLC
2.3%
OUSA

-

Basic Materials

QLC
2.1%
OUSA

-

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

QLC vs. OUSA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QLC
QLC Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
QLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
QLC Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
QLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
QLC Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

OUSA
OUSA Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
OUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
OUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
OUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
OUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QLC vs. OUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


QLCOUSADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.28

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.39

1.93

+1.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.13

6.75

+8.38

QLC vs. OUSA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLC Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is higher than the OUSA Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLC and OUSA, 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...

Drawdowns

QLC vs. OUSA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLC drawdown since its inception was -35.86%, which is greater than OUSA's maximum drawdown of -33.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLC and OUSA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QLCOUSADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.86%

-33.12%

-2.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.84%

-8.36%

-0.48%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.49%

-13.14%

-5.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.81%

-19.54%

-4.27%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.86%

-33.12%

-2.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.49%

-3.50%

-0.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.98%

2.39%

-0.41%

Volatility

QLC vs. OUSA - Volatility Comparison

FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA) have volatilities of 3.89% and 3.81%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QLCOUSADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.89%

3.81%

+0.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.51%

8.12%

+2.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.30%

10.31%

+2.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.94%

13.39%

+3.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.41%

15.20%

+3.21%

QLC vs. OUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLC has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than OUSA's 0.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

QLC vs. OUSA - Dividend Comparison

QLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than OUSA's 1.33% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
OUSA
OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF
1.33%1.39%1.50%1.81%1.92%1.56%2.03%2.31%3.06%2.15%2.32%1.17%
QLC
FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund
0.90%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


QLC and OUSA have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QLC has higher volatility (3.89%) compared to OUSA (3.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLC dropped -35.86% vs OUSA's -33.12%.

On 10-year performance, QLC leads with 14.87% vs 10.54% for OUSA. On fees, QLC is cheaper at 0.25% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QLC has performed better with a 14.87% return vs 10.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QLC is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for OUSA.

OUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.90% for QLC.

QLC tracks Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index, while OUSA tracks O'Shares US Quality Dividend Index. They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and O'Shares Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for QLC and 0.48% for OUSA.

QLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 1.58), 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 QLC and OUSA

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