QLV vs. VFMV
QLV (FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund) and VFMV (Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QLV is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility Index, while VFMV is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Vanguard. QLV is passively managed, while VFMV is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, QLV returned 10.73%/yr vs 9.82%/yr for VFMV. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QLV charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFMV.
Performance
QLV vs. VFMV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QLV achieves a 5.48% return, which is significantly lower than VFMV's 8.53% return.
QLV
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 2.14%
- YTD
- 5.48%
- 6M
- 5.38%
- 1Y
- 14.06%
- 3Y*
- 15.15%
- 5Y*
- 10.73%
- 10Y*
- —
VFMV
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- 1.30%
- YTD
- 8.53%
- 6M
- 8.37%
- 1Y
- 13.05%
- 3Y*
- 14.70%
- 5Y*
- 9.82%
- 10Y*
- —
QLV vs. VFMV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund | 5.48% | 12.28% | 18.08% | 13.71% | -9.97% | 26.08% | 9.63% | 6.24% |
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF | 8.53% | 10.52% | 16.91% | 8.86% | -5.73% | 20.75% | -0.19% | 5.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between QLV and VFMV is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 17, 2019 | 0.91 |
The correlation between QLV and VFMV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
QLV vs. VFMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QLV
VFMV
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Industrials
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
Technology
QLV
VFMV
Healthcare
QLV
VFMV
Financial Services
QLV
VFMV
Consumer Defensive
QLV
VFMV
Communication Services
QLV
VFMV
Consumer Cyclical
QLV
VFMV
Utilities
QLV
VFMV
Industrials
QLV
VFMV
Energy
QLV
VFMV
Basic Materials
QLV
VFMV
-
Real Estate
QLV
VFMV
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
QLV vs. VFMV — Risk / Return Rank
QLV
VFMV
QLV vs. VFMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV). 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 | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.26 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.28 | 2.18 | +0.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.69 | 8.57 | +1.12 |
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
| QLV | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.85 | 1.49 | +0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 | 0.84 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.69 | 0.69 | 0.00 |
Drawdowns
QLV vs. VFMV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QLV drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, roughly equal to the maximum VFMV drawdown of -33.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLV and VFMV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QLV | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.71% | -33.64% | -0.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.19% | -6.00% | -0.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.05% | -10.35% | -1.70% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.93% | -15.41% | -2.52% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.81% | -1.02% | +0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.00% | -3.64% | -0.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.45% | 1.53% | -0.08% |
Volatility
QLV vs. VFMV - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) is 1.61%, while Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) has a volatility of 2.09%. This indicates that QLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VFMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QLV | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.61% | 2.09% | -0.48% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.34% | 6.30% | -0.96% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.65% | 8.80% | -1.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.64% | 11.75% | +0.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.57% | 14.25% | +2.32% |
QLV vs. VFMV - Expense Ratio Comparison
QLV has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMV's 0.13% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
QLV vs. VFMV - Dividend Comparison
QLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, less than VFMV's 1.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund | 1.52% | 1.60% | 1.66% | 1.60% | 1.74% | 0.96% | 1.24% | 0.58% | 0.00% |
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF | 1.93% | 2.12% | 1.46% | 2.20% | 2.08% | 1.31% | 2.14% | 2.43% | 2.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QLV and VFMV have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
VFMV has higher volatility (2.09%) compared to QLV (1.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLV dropped -33.71% vs VFMV's -33.64%.
On 5-year performance, QLV leads with 10.73% vs 9.82% for VFMV. On fees, VFMV is cheaper at 0.13% 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.
Over the 5-year period, QLV has performed better with a 10.73% return vs 9.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VFMV is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.22% for QLV.
VFMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 1.52% for QLV.
QLV is categorized as Volatility Hedged Equity, while VFMV is Mid Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for QLV and 0.13% for VFMV.
QLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs 1.49), 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 QLV and VFMV
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