QLC vs. SPTM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QLC (FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund) and SPTM (SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - QLC tracks the Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index while SPTM tracks the S&P Composite 1500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QLC returned 14.83%/yr vs 15.21%/yr for SPTM. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QLC charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SPTM.

Performance

QLC vs. SPTM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF (SPTM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with QLC having a 11.39% return and SPTM slightly lower at 11.10%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with QLC having a 14.83% annualized return and SPTM not far ahead at 15.21%.

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%

SPTM

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 4.87%
• YTD: 11.10%
• 6M: 11.13%
• 1Y: 27.84%
• 3Y*: 21.90%
• 5Y*: 13.38%
• 10Y*: 15.21%

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

QLC vs. SPTM - 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%
SPTM SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF	11.10%	16.93%	23.87%	25.55%	-17.75%	28.58%	17.94%	31.34%	-5.30%	21.18%

Correlation

The correlation between QLC and SPTM is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2015	0.89

The correlation between QLC and SPTM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

QLC vs. SPTM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QLC	SPTM
Technology	34.8%	34.0%
Financial Services	13.8%	12.1%
Communication Services	13.8%	10.5%
Healthcare	10.1%	8.6%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	10.3%
Industrials	6.6%	9.4%
Utilities	3.4%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	4.8%
Real Estate	2.3%	2.3%
Basic Materials	2.2%	2.0%
Energy	2.0%	3.7%

Return for Risk

QLC vs. SPTM — 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

SPTM

SPTM Risk / Return Rank: 70
SPTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
SPTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
SPTM Omega Ratio Rank: 69
SPTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
SPTM Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. SPTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF (SPTM). 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	SPTM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.69	2.36	+0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	3.23	+0.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.43	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.76	3.22	+0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.59	15.01	+2.58
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. SPTM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLC Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is comparable to the SPTM Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLC and SPTM, 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	SPTM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.69	2.36	+0.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91	0.80	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.81	0.85	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.80	0.46	+0.34

Drawdowns

QLC vs. SPTM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLC drawdown since its inception was -35.86%, smaller than the maximum SPTM drawdown of -54.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLC and SPTM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QLC	SPTM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.86%	-54.80%	+18.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.84%	-8.68%	-0.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.49%	-18.87%	+0.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.81%	-24.14%	+0.33%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.86%	-34.66%	-1.20%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.74%	-0.67%	-0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.54%	-9.05%	+4.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.89%	1.86%	+0.03%

Volatility

QLC vs. SPTM - Volatility Comparison

FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF (SPTM) have volatilities of 2.94% and 2.88%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	QLC	SPTM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.94%	2.88%	+0.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.51%	8.92%	+0.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.38%	11.88%	+0.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.82%	16.87%	-0.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.42%	18.03%	+0.39%

QLC vs. SPTM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLC has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than SPTM's 0.03% 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. SPTM - Dividend Comparison

QLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than SPTM's 1.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
SPTM SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF	1.04%	1.13%	1.28%	1.44%	1.69%	1.25%	1.56%	1.72%	1.90%	1.66%	1.91%	1.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QLC and SPTM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, QLC and SPTM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, QLC or SPTM?

QLC has higher volatility (2.94%) compared to SPTM (2.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLC dropped -35.86% vs SPTM's -54.80%.

Which ETF is better, QLC or SPTM?

On 10-year performance, SPTM leads with 15.21% vs 14.83% for QLC. On fees, SPTM is cheaper at 0.03% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QLC or SPTM?

Over the 10-year period, SPTM has performed better with a 15.21% 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 SPTM?

SPTM is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for QLC.

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

SPTM has the higher dividend yield at 1.04%, compared with 0.88% for QLC.

What is the main difference between QLC and SPTM?

QLC tracks Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index, while SPTM tracks S&P Composite 1500 Index. They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for QLC and 0.03% for SPTM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 2.36), 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.