QUS vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QUS (SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. QUS is passively managed, while GRW is actively managed. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QUS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

QUS vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

QUS

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: 2.68%
• YTD: 6.67%
• 6M: 6.93%
• 1Y: 17.65%
• 3Y*: 17.53%
• 5Y*: 11.08%
• 10Y*: 13.67%

GRW

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QUS vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
QUS SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF	-0.50%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	1.29%

Correlation

The correlation between QUS and GRW is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026	0.40

QUS vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QUS	GRW
Technology	26.3%	26.6%
Financial Services	14.6%	9.8%
Healthcare	13.4%	4.1%
Communication Services	10.2%	9.1%
Consumer Defensive	9.2%	-
Industrials	8.6%	38.1%
Consumer Cyclical	5.8%	8.3%
Energy	4.6%	-
Utilities	3.6%	-
Basic Materials	2.3%	4.0%
Real Estate	1.4%	-

Return for Risk

QUS vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

QUS

QUS Risk / Return Rank: 57
QUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
QUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
QUS Omega Ratio Rank: 55
QUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
QUS Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

QUS vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). 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.

	QUS	GRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.95	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.54	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QUS	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.95	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.83	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	14.00	-13.22

Drawdowns

QUS vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QUS drawdown since its inception was -33.78%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QUS and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	QUS	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.78%	-0.45%	-33.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.85%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.94%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.30%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.78%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.50%	-0.45%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.70%	-0.14%	-3.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.53%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QUS	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.78%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.66%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.09%	10.19%	-1.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.33%	10.19%	+4.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.42%	10.19%	+6.23%

QUS vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

QUS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

QUS vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

QUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QUS SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF	1.31%	1.38%	1.49%	1.57%	1.68%	1.27%	1.73%	1.81%	2.12%	1.86%	2.07%	1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QUS and GRW in my portfolio?

QUS and GRW have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QUS or GRW?

On fees, QUS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QUS or GRW?

QUS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QUS or GRW?

QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between QUS and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QUS and 0.75% for GRW.