PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QUSA vs. OMAH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QUSA vs. OMAH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF (QUSA) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QUSA achieves a 9.80% return, which is significantly higher than OMAH's 5.30% return.


QUSA

1D
0.40%
1M
3.64%
YTD
9.80%
6M
10.73%
1Y
3.84%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

OMAH

1D
-0.32%
1M
0.99%
YTD
5.30%
6M
5.17%
1Y
12.64%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QUSA vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QUSA and OMAH is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2025

0.46

QUSA vs. OMAH - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QUSA
OMAH

Technology

36.9%
13.6%

Consumer Defensive

17.7%
16.2%

Communication Services

13.3%
9.8%

Financial Services

12.8%
38.9%

Industrials

11.1%

-

Healthcare

8.2%
7.0%

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

4.1%

Energy

-

10.5%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

QUSA
36.9%
OMAH
13.6%

Consumer Defensive

QUSA
17.7%
OMAH
16.2%

Communication Services

QUSA
13.3%
OMAH
9.8%

Financial Services

QUSA
12.8%
OMAH
38.9%

Industrials

QUSA
11.1%
OMAH

-

Healthcare

QUSA
8.2%
OMAH
7.0%

Basic Materials

QUSA

-

OMAH

-

Consumer Cyclical

QUSA

-

OMAH
4.1%

Energy

QUSA

-

OMAH
10.5%

Real Estate

QUSA

-

OMAH

-

Utilities

QUSA

-

OMAH

-

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

QUSA vs. OMAH — Risk / Return Rank

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

QUSA
QUSA Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
QUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
QUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
QUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
QUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

OMAH
OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QUSA vs. OMAH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF (QUSA) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). 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.


QUSAOMAHDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.37

1.58

-1.21

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.61

2.23

-1.62

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.28

-0.21

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.38

4.21

-3.83

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

0.90

10.55

-9.65

QUSA vs. OMAH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QUSA Sharpe Ratio is 0.37, which is lower than the OMAH Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QUSA and OMAH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QUSAOMAHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.37

1.58

-1.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.57

0.75

-0.18

Drawdowns

QUSA vs. OMAH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QUSA drawdown since its inception was -10.64%, smaller than the maximum OMAH drawdown of -11.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QUSA and OMAH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QUSAOMAHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.64%

-11.83%

+1.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.12%

-3.00%

-7.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.97%

+1.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.87%

-1.25%

-2.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.25%

1.20%

+3.05%

Volatility

QUSA vs. OMAH - Volatility Comparison

VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF (QUSA) has a higher volatility of 2.40% compared to VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) at 1.79%. This indicates that QUSA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OMAH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QUSAOMAHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.40%

1.79%

+0.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.17%

5.44%

+2.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.35%

8.02%

+2.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.37%

13.22%

-2.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.37%

13.22%

-2.85%

QUSA vs. OMAH - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QUSA and OMAH have an expense ratio of 0.95%.


Dividends

QUSA vs. OMAH - Dividend Comparison

QUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.47%, less than OMAH's 15.33% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


QUSA and OMAH have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QUSA has higher volatility (2.40%) compared to OMAH (1.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QUSA dropped -10.64% vs OMAH's -11.83%.

On 1-year performance, OMAH leads with 12.64% vs 3.84% for QUSA. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, OMAH has been the lower-risk option at 1.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, OMAH has performed better with a 12.64% return vs 3.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QUSA and OMAH have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

OMAH has the higher dividend yield at 15.33%, compared with 12.47% for QUSA.

OMAH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.58 vs 0.37), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QUSA and OMAH

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