QLTY vs. SQLV

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

QLTY (GMO U.S. Quality ETF) and SQLV (Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF) are both Quality Factor funds. QLTY is passively managed, while SQLV is actively managed. Over the past year, QLTY returned 25.15% vs 37.64% for SQLV. Their 0.64 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. QLTY charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for SQLV.

Performance

QLTY vs. SQLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) and Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QLTY achieves a 9.02% return, which is significantly lower than SQLV's 23.57% return.

QLTY

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 0.19%
• 6M: 6.82%
• YTD: 9.02%
• 1Y: 25.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.22%

SQLV

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 1.00%
• 6M: 18.55%
• YTD: 23.57%
• 1Y: 37.64%
• 3Y*: 12.11%
• 5Y*: 8.18%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.92%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF	$14.32M	$16.07M	$19.07M
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	$1.18M	$614.27K	$248.07K

QLTY vs. SQLV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF	9.02%	21.26%	21.02%	5.25%
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	23.57%	2.50%	4.76%	12.33%

Correlation

The correlation between QLTY and SQLV is 0.64, 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.	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 15, 2023	0.64

The correlation between QLTY and SQLV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

QLTY vs. SQLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QLTY	SQLV
Technology	39.6%	15.9%
Healthcare	22.6%	18.7%
Communication Services	11.0%	6.0%
Financial Services	8.1%	19.0%
Consumer Defensive	7.3%	7.4%
Consumer Cyclical	7.0%	13.8%
Industrials	4.5%	10.3%
Basic Materials	-	3.8%
Energy	-	4.0%
Real Estate	-	0.9%
Utilities	-	0.2%

Return for Risk

QLTY vs. SQLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

QLTY

QLTY Risk / Return Rank: 73
QLTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QLTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
QLTY Omega Ratio Rank: 78
QLTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
QLTY Martin Ratio Rank: 67

SQLV

SQLV Risk / Return Rank: 86
SQLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
SQLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
SQLV Omega Ratio Rank: 81
SQLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
SQLV Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

QLTY vs. SQLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) and Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV). 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.

	QLTY	SQLV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	2.02	-0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.62	2.97	-0.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.34	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.01	3.95	-1.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.13	12.39	-4.26

QLTY vs. SQLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLTY Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the SQLV Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLTY and SQLV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

QLTY vs. SQLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLTY drawdown since its inception was -17.00%, smaller than the maximum SQLV drawdown of -48.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLTY and SQLV.

Drawdown Indicators

	QLTY	SQLV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.00%	-48.34%	+31.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.71%	-8.84%	-2.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-26.86%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	-1.74%	+1.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.00%	-8.80%	+6.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.90%	2.81%	+0.09%

Volatility

QLTY vs. SQLV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) is 2.90%, while Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) has a volatility of 4.34%. This indicates that QLTY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SQLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QLTY	SQLV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.90%	4.34%	-1.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.63%	11.60%	-1.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.76%	17.33%	-4.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.52%	20.87%	-6.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.52%	23.24%	-8.72%

QLTY vs. SQLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLTY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than SQLV's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

QLTY vs. SQLV - Dividend Comparison

QLTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.72%, less than SQLV's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QLTY GMO U.S. Quality ETF	0.72%	0.73%	0.79%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	0.95%	1.15%	1.11%	1.09%	1.24%	1.12%	1.22%	1.20%	1.08%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QLTY and SQLV in my portfolio?

QLTY and SQLV have a correlation of 0.64, 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 SQLV?

SQLV has higher volatility (4.34%) compared to QLTY (2.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLTY dropped -17.00% vs SQLV's -48.34%.

Which ETF is better, QLTY or SQLV?

On 1-year performance, SQLV leads with 37.64% vs 25.15% for QLTY. On fees, QLTY is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QLTY has been the lower-risk option at 2.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QLTY or SQLV?

Over the 1-year period, SQLV has performed better with a 37.64% return vs 25.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QLTY or SQLV?

QLTY is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SQLV.

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

SQLV has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.72% for QLTY.

What is the main difference between QLTY and SQLV?

They also come from different issuers: GMO and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for QLTY and 0.60% for SQLV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SQLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.86), 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.