QLV vs. EJAN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QLV (FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund) and EJAN (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January) are both Volatility Hedged Equity funds - QLV tracks the Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility Index while EJAN tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QLV returned 10.73%/yr vs 2.91%/yr for EJAN. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QLV charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EJAN.

Performance

QLV vs. EJAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QLV achieves a 5.48% return, which is significantly lower than EJAN's 6.45% return.

QLV

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 2.14%
• YTD: 5.48%
• 6M: 5.38%
• 1Y: 14.06%
• 3Y*: 15.15%
• 5Y*: 10.73%
• 10Y*: —

EJAN

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 0.93%
• YTD: 6.45%
• 6M: 7.11%
• 1Y: 15.77%
• 3Y*: 8.49%
• 5Y*: 2.91%
• 10Y*: —

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

QLV vs. EJAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund	5.48%	12.28%	18.08%	13.71%	-9.97%	26.08%	9.10%
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	6.45%	14.78%	2.69%	5.37%	-8.01%	-1.53%	10.46%

Correlation

The correlation between QLV and EJAN is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2020	0.52

The correlation between QLV and EJAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.42 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

QLV vs. EJAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QLV	EJAN
Technology	28.6%	37.0%
Healthcare	12.7%	2.9%
Financial Services	12.3%	19.4%
Consumer Defensive	8.5%	3.0%
Communication Services	8.4%	6.9%
Consumer Cyclical	6.8%	9.6%
Utilities	6.5%	2.1%
Industrials	6.3%	7.5%
Energy	5.8%	4.0%
Basic Materials	2.4%	6.5%
Real Estate	1.7%	1.1%

Return for Risk

QLV vs. EJAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

QLV

QLV Risk / Return Rank: 53
QLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
QLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QLV Omega Ratio Rank: 51
QLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
QLV Martin Ratio Rank: 56

EJAN

EJAN Risk / Return Rank: 63
EJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
EJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
EJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 79
EJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
EJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

QLV vs. EJAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN). 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.

	QLV	EJAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.85	2.00	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.68	2.91	-0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.47	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.28	2.39	-0.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.69	11.15	-1.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QLV vs. EJAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is comparable to the EJAN Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLV and EJAN, 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

	QLV	EJAN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.85	2.00	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85	0.26	+0.59
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	0.35	+0.34

Drawdowns

QLV vs. EJAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLV drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, which is greater than EJAN's maximum drawdown of -22.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLV and EJAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	QLV	EJAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.71%	-22.23%	-11.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.19%	-6.63%	+0.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.05%	-11.75%	-0.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.93%	-22.00%	+4.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.81%	-0.39%	-0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.00%	-5.78%	+1.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.45%	1.42%	+0.03%

Volatility

QLV vs. EJAN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) is 1.61%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN) has a volatility of 2.14%. This indicates that QLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EJAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QLV	EJAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.61%	2.14%	-0.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.34%	7.29%	-1.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.65%	7.92%	-0.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.64%	11.11%	+1.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.57%	12.68%	+3.89%

QLV vs. EJAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLV has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than EJAN's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

QLV vs. EJAN - Dividend Comparison

QLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, while EJAN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund	1.52%	1.60%	1.66%	1.60%	1.74%	0.96%	1.24%	0.58%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QLV and EJAN in my portfolio?

QLV and EJAN have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QLV or EJAN?

EJAN has higher volatility (2.14%) compared to QLV (1.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLV dropped -33.71% vs EJAN's -22.23%.

Which ETF is better, QLV or EJAN?

On 5-year performance, QLV leads with 10.73% vs 2.91% for EJAN. On fees, QLV is cheaper at 0.22% per year. On volatility, QLV has been the lower-risk option at 1.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QLV or EJAN?

Over the 5-year period, QLV has performed better with a 10.73% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QLV or EJAN?

QLV is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EJAN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QLV or EJAN?

QLV has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.00% for EJAN.

What is the main difference between QLV and EJAN?

QLV tracks Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility Index, while EJAN tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index. They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for QLV and 0.89% for EJAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EJAN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.85), 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.