QSML vs. SQLV

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

QSML (Wisdomtree U.S. Smallcap Quality Growth Fund) and SQLV (Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF) are both Quality Factor funds. QSML is passively managed, while SQLV is actively managed. Over the past year, QSML returned 31.80% vs 40.94% for SQLV. Their correlation of 0.94 means they have usually moved in the same direction. QSML charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for SQLV.

Performance

QSML vs. SQLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Wisdomtree U.S. Smallcap Quality Growth Fund (QSML) 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, QSML achieves a 19.46% return, which is significantly lower than SQLV's 26.53% return.

QSML

• 1D: 1.98%
• 1M: 2.30%
• 6M: 15.89%
• YTD: 19.46%
• 1Y: 31.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.80%

SQLV

• 1D: 2.40%
• 1M: 3.42%
• 6M: 19.47%
• YTD: 26.53%
• 1Y: 40.94%
• 3Y*: 13.50%
• 5Y*: 8.73%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.20%

*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)
QSML Wisdomtree U.S. Smallcap Quality Growth Fund	$17.22K	$17.81K	$19.02K
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	$1.21M	$631.84K	$254.10K

QSML vs. SQLV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QSML Wisdomtree U.S. Smallcap Quality Growth Fund	19.46%	5.49%	9.93%
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	26.53%	2.50%	7.79%

Correlation

The correlation between QSML and SQLV is 0.93, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.94

The correlation between QSML and SQLV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

QSML vs. SQLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QSML	SQLV
Technology	21.4%	15.9%
Consumer Cyclical	18.1%	13.8%
Financial Services	15.6%	19.0%
Industrials	13.8%	10.3%
Healthcare	13.7%	18.7%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	7.4%
Energy	4.0%	4.0%
Communication Services	2.9%	6.0%
Basic Materials	2.4%	3.8%
Real Estate	0.3%	0.9%
Utilities	0.2%	0.2%

Return for Risk

QSML vs. SQLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

QSML

QSML Risk / Return Rank: 75
QSML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
QSML Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
QSML Omega Ratio Rank: 70
QSML Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
QSML Martin Ratio Rank: 75

SQLV

SQLV Risk / Return Rank: 90
SQLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
SQLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
SQLV Omega Ratio Rank: 87
SQLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
SQLV Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

QSML vs. SQLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Wisdomtree U.S. Smallcap Quality Growth Fund (QSML) 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.

	QSML	SQLV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	2.38	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	3.46	-0.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.40	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.98	4.65	-1.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.05	14.61	-4.56

QSML vs. SQLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QSML Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the SQLV Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QSML 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

QSML vs. SQLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QSML drawdown since its inception was -28.54%, smaller than the maximum SQLV drawdown of -48.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QSML and SQLV.

Drawdown Indicators

	QSML	SQLV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.54%	-48.34%	+19.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.72%	-8.84%	-1.88%
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	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.63%	-8.80%	+3.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.17%	2.81%	+0.36%

Volatility

QSML vs. SQLV - Volatility Comparison

Wisdomtree U.S. Smallcap Quality Growth Fund (QSML) and Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) have volatilities of 4.71% and 4.92%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QSML	SQLV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.71%	4.92%	-0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.38%	11.82%	+0.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.49%	17.32%	+0.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.59%	20.90%	-0.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.59%	23.25%	-2.66%

QSML vs. SQLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

QSML has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than SQLV's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

QSML vs. SQLV - Dividend Comparison

QSML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, less than SQLV's 0.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QSML Wisdomtree U.S. Smallcap Quality Growth Fund	0.52%	0.62%	0.32%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	0.93%	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 QSML and SQLV in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, QSML and SQLV move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, QSML or SQLV?

SQLV has higher volatility (4.92%) compared to QSML (4.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QSML dropped -28.54% vs SQLV's -48.34%.

Which ETF is better, QSML or SQLV?

On 1-year performance, SQLV leads with 40.94% vs 31.80% for QSML. On fees, QSML is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, QSML has been the lower-risk option at 4.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QSML or SQLV?

Over the 1-year period, SQLV has performed better with a 40.94% return vs 31.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QSML or SQLV?

QSML is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SQLV.

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

SQLV has the higher dividend yield at 0.93%, compared with 0.52% for QSML.

What is the main difference between QSML and SQLV?

They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for QSML and 0.60% for SQLV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SQLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.83), 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.