QSTFX vs. FLMFX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QSTFX (Quantified STF Fund) and FLMFX (Meeder Muirfield Fund) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Over the past 10 years, QSTFX returned 19.25%/yr vs 12.23%/yr for FLMFX. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QSTFX charges 1.55%/yr vs 1.20%/yr for FLMFX.

Performance

QSTFX vs. FLMFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Quantified STF Fund (QSTFX) and Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QSTFX achieves a 25.73% return, which is significantly higher than FLMFX's 10.81% return. Over the past 10 years, QSTFX has outperformed FLMFX with an annualized return of 19.25%, while FLMFX has yielded a comparatively lower 12.23% annualized return.

QSTFX

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 6.25%
• YTD: 25.73%
• 6M: 21.99%
• 1Y: 54.25%
• 3Y*: 22.16%
• 5Y*: 11.39%
• 10Y*: 19.25%

FLMFX

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 1.19%
• YTD: 10.81%
• 6M: 9.73%
• 1Y: 25.81%
• 3Y*: 23.41%
• 5Y*: 13.49%
• 10Y*: 12.23%

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

QSTFX vs. FLMFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QSTFX Quantified STF Fund	25.73%	-2.48%	29.94%	61.87%	-46.15%	28.79%	78.20%	16.43%	-6.86%	68.46%
FLMFX Meeder Muirfield Fund	10.81%	15.28%	36.53%	13.79%	-11.16%	20.18%	4.36%	13.52%	-3.65%	20.30%

Correlation

The correlation between QSTFX and FLMFX is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2015	0.69

The correlation between QSTFX and FLMFX shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (5 years) to 0.73 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

QSTFX vs. FLMFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

QSTFX

QSTFX Risk / Return Rank: 61
QSTFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
QSTFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
QSTFX Omega Ratio Rank: 69
QSTFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
QSTFX Martin Ratio Rank: 41

FLMFX

FLMFX Risk / Return Rank: 62
FLMFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
FLMFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
FLMFX Omega Ratio Rank: 57
FLMFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
FLMFX Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

QSTFX vs. FLMFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Quantified STF Fund (QSTFX) and Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX). 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.

	QSTFX	FLMFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.21	2.14	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.83	2.92	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.38	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.25	2.90	+0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.31	12.52	-4.21

QSTFX vs. FLMFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QSTFX Sharpe Ratio is 2.21, which is comparable to the FLMFX Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QSTFX and FLMFX, 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

QSTFX vs. FLMFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QSTFX drawdown since its inception was -49.03%, which is greater than FLMFX's maximum drawdown of -42.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QSTFX and FLMFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	QSTFX	FLMFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.03%	-42.42%	-6.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.87%	-9.26%	-8.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.22%	-16.08%	-16.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-49.03%	-18.19%	-30.84%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-49.03%	-24.33%	-24.70%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.39%	-0.54%	-0.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.41%	-9.25%	-6.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.98%	2.14%	+4.84%

Volatility

QSTFX vs. FLMFX - Volatility Comparison

Quantified STF Fund (QSTFX) has a higher volatility of 8.99% compared to Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX) at 4.65%. This indicates that QSTFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLMFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QSTFX	FLMFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.99%	4.65%	+4.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.64%	9.95%	+9.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.28%	12.61%	+13.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.28%	14.64%	+12.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.03%	14.12%	+13.91%

QSTFX vs. FLMFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

QSTFX has a 1.55% expense ratio, which is higher than FLMFX's 1.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

QSTFX vs. FLMFX - Dividend Comparison

QSTFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.47%, more than FLMFX's 4.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLMFX Meeder Muirfield Fund	4.92%	5.55%	31.99%	2.83%	2.76%	3.39%	0.58%	2.69%	1.50%	8.25%	0.72%	2.72%
QSTFX Quantified STF Fund	8.47%	10.65%	5.12%	1.03%	0.00%	21.93%	20.82%	0.52%	2.57%	39.11%	0.01%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QSTFX and FLMFX in my portfolio?

QSTFX and FLMFX have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QSTFX or FLMFX?

QSTFX has higher volatility (8.99%) compared to FLMFX (4.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QSTFX dropped -49.03% vs FLMFX's -42.42%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QSTFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 2.14), 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.