QVML vs. AUSF
QVML (Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and AUSF (Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVML is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality, Value &Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while AUSF is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVML returned 22.47%/yr vs 20.14%/yr for AUSF. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QVML charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for AUSF.
Performance
QVML vs. AUSF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QVML achieves a 11.17% return, which is significantly higher than AUSF's 6.72% return.
QVML
- 1D
- -0.58%
- 1M
- 5.12%
- YTD
- 11.17%
- 6M
- 11.48%
- 1Y
- 27.60%
- 3Y*
- 22.47%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AUSF
- 1D
- -0.43%
- 1M
- 0.23%
- YTD
- 6.72%
- 6M
- 7.67%
- 1Y
- 15.11%
- 3Y*
- 20.14%
- 5Y*
- 12.71%
- 10Y*
- —
QVML vs. AUSF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVML Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 11.17% | 17.74% | 25.87% | 22.19% | -16.25% | 12.56% |
AUSF Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF | 6.72% | 13.69% | 16.05% | 22.26% | -0.18% | 9.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between QVML and AUSF is 0.52, 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 | 0.52 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021 | 0.73 |
Over the past year, the correlation between QVML and AUSF has dropped to 0.52 - well below their long-term average of 0.73, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
QVML vs. AUSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QVML
AUSF
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
QVML
AUSF
Financial Services
QVML
AUSF
Communication Services
QVML
AUSF
Healthcare
QVML
AUSF
Industrials
QVML
AUSF
Consumer Cyclical
QVML
AUSF
Consumer Defensive
QVML
AUSF
Energy
QVML
AUSF
Utilities
QVML
AUSF
Basic Materials
QVML
AUSF
Real Estate
QVML
AUSF
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
QVML vs. AUSF — Risk / Return Rank
QVML
AUSF
QVML vs. AUSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVML) and Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF). 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.
| QVML | AUSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.87 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.26 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.18 | 2.60 | +0.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.85 | 7.54 | +7.31 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QVML | AUSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.38 | 1.50 | +0.87 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.94 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.84 | 0.65 | +0.20 |
Drawdowns
QVML vs. AUSF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QVML drawdown since its inception was -23.52%, smaller than the maximum AUSF drawdown of -44.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVML and AUSF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QVML | AUSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.52% | -44.25% | +20.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.73% | -5.84% | -2.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.71% | -12.29% | -6.42% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -14.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.58% | -2.26% | +1.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.40% | -4.22% | -1.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.86% | 2.01% | -0.15% |
Volatility
QVML vs. AUSF - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVML) has a higher volatility of 2.91% compared to Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) at 2.41%. This indicates that QVML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AUSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QVML | AUSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.91% | 2.41% | +0.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.96% | 6.65% | +2.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.69% | 10.14% | +1.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 13.65% | +2.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 19.07% | -2.48% |
QVML vs. AUSF - Expense Ratio Comparison
QVML has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than AUSF's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
QVML vs. AUSF - Dividend Comparison
QVML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, less than AUSF's 2.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUSF Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF | 2.76% | 2.78% | 2.63% | 1.83% | 2.51% | 2.22% | 2.95% | 4.02% | 1.46% |
QVML Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 0.99% | 1.10% | 1.15% | 1.43% | 1.72% | 0.62% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QVML and AUSF have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QVML has higher volatility (2.91%) compared to AUSF (2.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVML dropped -23.52% vs AUSF's -44.25%.
On 3-year performance, QVML leads with 22.47% vs 20.14% for AUSF. On fees, QVML is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, AUSF has been the lower-risk option at 2.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, QVML has performed better with a 22.47% return vs 20.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QVML is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for AUSF.
AUSF has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 0.99% for QVML.
QVML is categorized as Multi-factor, while AUSF is Mid Cap Value Equities. QVML tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value &Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while AUSF tracks Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Factor Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for QVML and 0.27% for AUSF.
QVML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.50), 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.
Find the right allocation for QVML and AUSF
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