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 8.12% return, which is significantly lower than OMAH's 9.54% return.


QUSA

1D
0.38%
1M
-1.27%
6M
6.29%
YTD
8.12%
1Y
5.22%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
3.70%

OMAH

1D
-0.48%
1M
0.88%
6M
10.58%
YTD
9.54%
1Y
15.78%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
11.63%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$19.26M$17.24M$16.29M
$284.17K$298.42K$273.69K

QUSA vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QUSA and OMAH is 0.32, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.32

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2025

0.37

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

QUSA
QUSA Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
QUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
QUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
QUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
QUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

OMAH
OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.

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.


QUSAOMAHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.41

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.89

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.31

-0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.42

5.03

-4.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.05

12.06

-11.01

QUSA vs. OMAH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QUSA Sharpe Ratio is 0.36, which is lower than the OMAH Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. 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...

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

-9.49%

-2.95%

-6.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.15%

-1.05%

-2.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.59%

-1.23%

-2.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.76%

1.23%

+2.53%

Volatility

QUSA vs. OMAH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF (QUSA) is 2.92%, while VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) has a volatility of 3.15%. This indicates that QUSA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky 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

2.92%

3.15%

-0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.96%

5.90%

+3.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.95%

8.40%

+2.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.75%

12.84%

-2.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.75%

12.84%

-2.09%

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 15.54%, more than OMAH's 15.01% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


QUSA and OMAH have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

OMAH has higher volatility (3.15%) compared to QUSA (2.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QUSA dropped -10.64% vs OMAH's -11.83%.

On 1-year performance, OMAH leads with 15.78% vs 5.22% for QUSA. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, QUSA has been the lower-risk option at 2.92%. 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 15.78% return vs 5.22%. 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.

QUSA has the higher dividend yield at 15.54%, compared with 15.01% for OMAH.

QUSA is categorized as Quality Factor, while OMAH is Derivative Income.

OMAH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 0.36), 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