QRFT vs. GQGU
QRFT (QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF) and GQGU (GQG US Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.15, they often move in opposite directions. QRFT charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GQGU.
Performance
QRFT vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QRFT achieves a 12.70% return, which is significantly higher than GQGU's 6.44% return.
QRFT
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 5.38%
- YTD
- 12.70%
- 6M
- 12.87%
- 1Y
- 29.05%
- 3Y*
- 21.87%
- 5Y*
- 12.41%
- 10Y*
- —
GQGU
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- -1.69%
- YTD
- 6.44%
- 6M
- 7.69%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QRFT vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QRFT QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF | 12.70% | 9.21% |
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 6.44% | -1.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between QRFT and GQGU is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025 | -0.15 |
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
QRFT vs. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank
QRFT
GQGU
QRFT vs. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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.
| QRFT | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.20 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.15 | — | — |
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
| QRFT | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.23 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.86 | 0.58 | +0.28 |
Drawdowns
QRFT vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QRFT drawdown since its inception was -30.19%, which is greater than GQGU's maximum drawdown of -6.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QRFT and GQGU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QRFT | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.19% | -6.65% | -23.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.12% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.99% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.20% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.26% | -4.80% | +4.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.79% | -2.55% | -4.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.06% | — | — |
Volatility
QRFT vs. GQGU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QRFT | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.36% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.96% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.07% | 10.12% | +2.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.34% | 10.12% | +7.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.10% | 10.12% | +9.98% |
QRFT vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
QRFT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
QRFT vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison
QRFT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.25%, less than GQGU's 0.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 0.96% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QRFT QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF | 0.25% | 0.27% | 0.52% | 0.77% | 0.83% | 0.05% | 1.81% | 4.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QRFT and GQGU have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GQGU is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GQGU is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for QRFT.
GQGU has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.25% for QRFT.
They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for QRFT and 0.49% for GQGU.
Find the right allocation for QRFT and GQGU
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