QLTY vs. RSSY
QLTY (GMO U.S. Quality ETF) and RSSY (Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. QLTY is passively managed, while RSSY is actively managed. Over the past year, QLTY returned 28.67% vs 49.82% for RSSY. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QLTY charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.04%/yr for RSSY.
Performance
QLTY vs. RSSY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QLTY achieves a 7.91% return, which is significantly lower than RSSY's 32.66% return.
QLTY
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 3.91%
- YTD
- 7.91%
- 6M
- 8.88%
- 1Y
- 28.67%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RSSY
- 1D
- 0.15%
- 1M
- 1.84%
- YTD
- 32.66%
- 6M
- 28.27%
- 1Y
- 49.82%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QLTY vs. RSSY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF | 7.91% | 21.26% | 8.38% |
RSSY Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF | 32.66% | -3.52% | 1.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between QLTY and RSSY is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2024 | 0.55 |
The correlation between QLTY and RSSY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
QLTY vs. RSSY — Risk / Return Rank
QLTY
RSSY
QLTY vs. RSSY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) and Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF (RSSY). 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 | RSSY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.35 | 3.77 | -1.42 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.33 | 4.94 | -1.61 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.68 | -0.26 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | 6.70 | -4.22 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.13 | 23.02 | -12.89 |
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
| QLTY | RSSY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.35 | 3.77 | -1.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.55 | 0.75 | +0.80 |
Drawdowns
QLTY vs. RSSY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QLTY drawdown since its inception was -17.00%, smaller than the maximum RSSY drawdown of -29.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLTY and RSSY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QLTY | RSSY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.00% | -29.57% | +12.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.71% | -7.36% | -4.35% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.22% | 0.00% | -0.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.05% | -7.38% | +5.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.86% | 2.14% | +0.72% |
Volatility
QLTY vs. RSSY - Volatility Comparison
GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) has a higher volatility of 2.65% compared to Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF (RSSY) at 2.30%. This indicates that QLTY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSSY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QLTY | RSSY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.65% | 2.30% | +0.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.24% | 10.04% | -0.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.25% | 13.28% | -1.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.65% | 18.37% | -3.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.65% | 18.37% | -3.72% |
QLTY vs. RSSY - Expense Ratio Comparison
QLTY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than RSSY's 1.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
QLTY vs. RSSY - Dividend Comparison
QLTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.71%, less than RSSY's 1.53% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF | 0.71% | 0.73% | 0.79% | 0.15% |
RSSY Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF | 1.53% | 2.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QLTY and RSSY have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QLTY has higher volatility (2.65%) compared to RSSY (2.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLTY dropped -17.00% vs RSSY's -29.57%.
On 1-year performance, RSSY leads with 49.82% vs 28.67% for QLTY. On fees, QLTY is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, RSSY has been the lower-risk option at 2.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RSSY has performed better with a 49.82% return vs 28.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QLTY is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.04% for RSSY.
RSSY has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 0.71% for QLTY.
They also come from different issuers: GMO and Return Stacked. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for QLTY and 1.04% for RSSY.
RSSY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.77 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.
Find the right allocation for QLTY and RSSY
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