QLTY vs. CNAV

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

QLTY (GMO U.S. Quality ETF) and CNAV (Mohr Company Nav ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. QLTY is passively managed, while CNAV is actively managed. Over the past year, QLTY returned 28.67% vs 72.28% for CNAV. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QLTY charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.31%/yr for CNAV.

Performance

QLTY vs. CNAV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) and Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QLTY achieves a 7.91% return, which is significantly lower than CNAV's 45.64% return.

QLTY

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 3.91%
• YTD: 7.91%
• 6M: 8.88%
• 1Y: 28.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CNAV

• 1D: 4.58%
• 1M: 20.83%
• YTD: 45.64%
• 6M: 45.55%
• 1Y: 72.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QLTY vs. CNAV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF	7.91%	21.26%	-0.67%
CNAV Mohr Company Nav ETF	45.64%	16.80%	6.34%

Correlation

The correlation between QLTY and CNAV is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2024	0.70

The correlation between QLTY and CNAV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QLTY vs. CNAV — Risk / Return Rank

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

QLTY

QLTY Risk / Return Rank: 64
QLTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
QLTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
QLTY Omega Ratio Rank: 69
QLTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
QLTY Martin Ratio Rank: 57

CNAV

CNAV Risk / Return Rank: 85
CNAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CNAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
CNAV Omega Ratio Rank: 79
CNAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CNAV Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

QLTY vs. CNAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) and Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV). 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.

	QLTY	CNAV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.35	2.90	-0.55
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.33	3.60	-0.28
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.48	-0.07
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.48	5.74	-3.26
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.13	24.61	-14.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QLTY vs. CNAV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLTY Sharpe Ratio is 2.35, which is comparable to the CNAV Sharpe Ratio of 2.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLTY and CNAV, 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

	QLTY	CNAV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.35	2.90	-0.55
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.55	1.59	-0.04

Drawdowns

QLTY vs. CNAV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLTY drawdown since its inception was -17.00%, smaller than the maximum CNAV drawdown of -30.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLTY and CNAV.

Drawdown Indicators

	QLTY	CNAV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.00%	-30.06%	+13.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.71%	-12.97%	+1.26%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.22%	0.00%	-0.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.05%	-5.43%	+3.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.86%	3.02%	-0.16%

Volatility

QLTY vs. CNAV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) is 2.65%, while Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV) has a volatility of 12.29%. This indicates that QLTY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNAV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QLTY	CNAV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.65%	12.29%	-9.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.24%	21.03%	-11.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.25%	25.09%	-12.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.65%	27.19%	-12.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.65%	27.19%	-12.54%

QLTY vs. CNAV - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLTY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CNAV's 1.31% expense ratio.

Dividends

QLTY vs. CNAV - Dividend Comparison

QLTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.71%, while CNAV has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CNAV Mohr Company Nav ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF	0.71%	0.73%	0.79%	0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QLTY and CNAV in my portfolio?

QLTY and CNAV have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QLTY or CNAV?

CNAV has higher volatility (12.29%) compared to QLTY (2.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLTY dropped -17.00% vs CNAV's -30.06%.

Which ETF is better, QLTY or CNAV?

On 1-year performance, CNAV leads with 72.28% vs 28.67% for QLTY. On fees, QLTY is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QLTY has been the lower-risk option at 2.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QLTY or CNAV?

Over the 1-year period, CNAV has performed better with a 72.28% return vs 28.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QLTY or CNAV?

QLTY is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.31% for CNAV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QLTY or CNAV?

QLTY has the higher dividend yield at 0.71%, compared with 0.00% for CNAV.

What is the main difference between QLTY and CNAV?

They also come from different issuers: GMO and Mohr. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for QLTY and 1.31% for CNAV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNAV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.90 vs 2.35), 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.