QLTI vs. INVG
QLTI (GMO International Quality ETF) and INVG (GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QLTI is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by GMO, while INVG is a Corporate Bonds fund actively managed by GMO. Both are actively managed. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QLTI charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for INVG.
Performance
QLTI vs. INVG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QLTI achieves a -1.50% return, which is significantly lower than INVG's 0.68% return.
QLTI
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- 2.60%
- YTD
- -1.50%
- 6M
- 0.16%
- 1Y
- 3.61%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
INVG
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- 0.73%
- YTD
- 0.68%
- 6M
- 0.36%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QLTI vs. INVG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QLTI GMO International Quality ETF | -1.50% | 4.09% |
INVG GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF | 0.68% | 4.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between QLTI and INVG is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025 | 0.47 |
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
QLTI vs. INVG — Risk / Return Rank
QLTI
INVG
QLTI vs. INVG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO International Quality ETF (QLTI) and GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG). 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.
| QLTI | INVG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.26 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.76 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QLTI | INVG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.22 | 1.23 | -1.01 |
Drawdowns
QLTI vs. INVG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QLTI drawdown since its inception was -14.82%, which is greater than INVG's maximum drawdown of -3.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLTI and INVG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QLTI | INVG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.82% | -3.15% | -11.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.72% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.89% | -0.88% | -6.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.77% | -0.71% | -3.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.77% | — | — |
Volatility
QLTI vs. INVG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QLTI | INVG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.91% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.38% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.30% | 4.42% | +10.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.69% | 4.42% | +12.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.69% | 4.42% | +12.27% |
QLTI vs. INVG - Expense Ratio Comparison
QLTI has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than INVG's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
QLTI vs. INVG - Dividend Comparison
QLTI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than INVG's 4.68% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
INVG GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF | 4.68% | 2.81% | 0.00% |
QLTI GMO International Quality ETF | 0.53% | 0.52% | 0.19% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QLTI and INVG have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, INVG is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
INVG is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QLTI.
INVG has the higher dividend yield at 4.68%, compared with 0.53% for QLTI.
QLTI is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while INVG is Corporate Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QLTI and 0.25% for INVG.
Find the right allocation for QLTI and INVG
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