RECS vs. QUS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RECS (Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF) and QUS (SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - RECS tracks the Beta Advantage Research Enhanced U.S. Equity Index while QUS tracks the MSCI USA Factor Mix A-Series Capped (USD). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RECS returned 9.89%/yr vs 13.67%/yr for QUS. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

RECS vs. QUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) and SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with RECS having a 6.61% return and QUS slightly higher at 6.67%. Over the past 10 years, RECS has underperformed QUS with an annualized return of 9.89%, while QUS has yielded a comparatively higher 13.67% annualized return.

RECS

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 4.11%
• YTD: 6.61%
• 6M: 6.84%
• 1Y: 25.02%
• 3Y*: 21.66%
• 5Y*: 14.04%
• 10Y*: 9.89%

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%

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

RECS vs. QUS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	6.61%	19.30%	26.27%	23.19%	-14.39%	32.73%	15.35%	-0.93%	0.00%	0.00%
QUS SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF	6.67%	14.13%	18.99%	21.78%	-14.15%	26.72%	12.40%	32.45%	-3.66%	21.67%

Correlation

The correlation between RECS and QUS is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2015	0.73

The correlation between RECS and QUS shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (all time) to 0.92 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RECS vs. QUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RECS	QUS
Technology	33.6%	26.3%
Financial Services	13.2%	14.6%
Communication Services	11.0%	10.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	5.8%
Healthcare	9.9%	13.4%
Industrials	6.7%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	9.2%
Energy	3.4%	4.6%
Real Estate	2.3%	1.4%
Utilities	2.2%	3.6%
Basic Materials	2.1%	2.3%

Return for Risk

RECS vs. QUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

RECS

RECS Risk / Return Rank: 62
RECS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
RECS Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
RECS Omega Ratio Rank: 62
RECS Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
RECS Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

RECS vs. QUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) and SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). 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.

	RECS	QUS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.13	1.95	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.97	2.81	+0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.35	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.85	2.59	+0.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.27	11.54	+0.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RECS vs. QUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RECS Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is comparable to the QUS Sharpe Ratio of 1.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RECS and QUS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RECS	QUS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.13	1.95	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86	0.78	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.61	0.83	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.38	0.77	-0.39

Drawdowns

RECS vs. QUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RECS drawdown since its inception was -34.29%, roughly equal to the maximum QUS drawdown of -33.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RECS and QUS.

Drawdown Indicators

	RECS	QUS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.29%	-33.78%	-0.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.82%	-6.85%	-1.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.60%	-13.94%	-4.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.08%	-22.30%	+0.22%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.29%	-33.78%	-0.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.93%	-0.50%	-0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.28%	-3.70%	+2.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	1.53%	+0.51%

Volatility

RECS vs. QUS - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) has a higher volatility of 2.97% compared to SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) at 1.78%. This indicates that RECS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RECS	QUS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.97%	1.78%	+1.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.84%	6.66%	+2.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.78%	9.09%	+2.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.38%	14.33%	+2.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.22%	16.42%	-0.20%

RECS vs. QUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both RECS and QUS have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

RECS vs. QUS - Dividend Comparison

RECS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than QUS's 1.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	1.04%	1.11%	1.09%	1.00%	1.41%	20.64%	1.09%	0.49%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RECS and QUS in my portfolio?

RECS and QUS have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RECS or QUS?

RECS has higher volatility (2.97%) compared to QUS (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RECS dropped -34.29% vs QUS's -33.78%.

Which ETF is better, RECS or QUS?

On 10-year performance, QUS leads with 13.67% vs 9.89% for RECS. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, QUS has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RECS or QUS?

Over the 10-year period, QUS has performed better with a 13.67% return vs 9.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RECS or QUS?

RECS and QUS have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

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

QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 1.04% for RECS.

What is the main difference between RECS and QUS?

RECS tracks Beta Advantage Research Enhanced U.S. Equity Index, while QUS tracks MSCI USA Factor Mix A-Series Capped (USD). They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and State Street.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RECS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 1.95), 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.