RFFC vs. QUS

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

RFFC (ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF) and QUS (State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. RFFC is actively managed, while QUS is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFFC returned 12.66%/yr vs 13.54%/yr for QUS. Their correlation of 0.89 means they have usually moved in the same direction. RFFC charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QUS.

Performance

RFFC vs. QUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFFC achieves a 13.17% return, which is significantly higher than QUS's 10.23% return. Over the past 10 years, RFFC has underperformed QUS with an annualized return of 12.66%, while QUS has yielded a comparatively higher 13.54% annualized return.

RFFC

• 1D: 1.00%
• 1M: 0.70%
• 6M: 7.66%
• YTD: 13.17%
• 1Y: 25.29%
• 3Y*: 20.49%
• 5Y*: 11.88%
• 10Y*: 12.66%
• ALL TIME*: 12.74%

QUS

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: 1.29%
• 6M: 7.60%
• YTD: 10.23%
• 1Y: 19.80%
• 3Y*: 17.10%
• 5Y*: 10.91%
• 10Y*: 13.54%
• ALL TIME*: 12.75%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QUS State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF	$3.01M	$4.81M	$3.43M
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF	$84.66K	$66.37K	$69.76K

RFFC vs. QUS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF	13.17%	16.83%	23.51%	19.50%	-14.58%	22.33%	12.48%	24.77%	-10.23%	21.02%
QUS State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF	10.23%	14.13%	18.99%	21.78%	-14.15%	26.72%	12.40%	32.45%	-3.66%	21.67%

Correlation

The correlation between RFFC and QUS is 0.85, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 7, 2016	0.89

The correlation between RFFC and QUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFFC vs. QUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFFC	QUS
Technology	32.4%	28.4%
Industrials	13.4%	8.1%
Healthcare	12.5%	14.4%
Financial Services	11.0%	15.7%
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	5.7%
Communication Services	8.0%	8.2%
Energy	4.4%	3.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	8.3%
Utilities	2.5%	3.9%
Basic Materials	2.3%	2.2%
Real Estate	2.2%	1.6%

Return for Risk

RFFC vs. QUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFFC

RFFC Risk / Return Rank: 80
RFFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
RFFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
RFFC Omega Ratio Rank: 79
RFFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
RFFC Martin Ratio Rank: 83

QUS

QUS Risk / Return Rank: 85
QUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
QUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
QUS Omega Ratio Rank: 86
QUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
QUS Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

RFFC vs. QUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) and State Street 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.

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.

	RFFC	QUS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	2.16	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.86	3.05	-0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.39	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	2.90	-0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.26	12.95	-0.69

RFFC vs. QUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFFC Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is comparable to the QUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFFC 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.

Drawdowns

RFFC vs. QUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFFC drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, which is greater than QUS's maximum drawdown of -33.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFFC and QUS.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFFC	QUS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.26%	-33.78%	-2.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.25%	-6.85%	-2.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.45%	-13.94%	-4.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.29%	-22.30%	+0.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.26%	-33.78%	-2.48%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.96%	-3.66%	-1.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.07%	1.53%	+0.54%

Volatility

RFFC vs. QUS - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) has a higher volatility of 3.28% compared to State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) at 2.42%. This indicates that RFFC'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

	RFFC	QUS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.28%	2.42%	+0.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.86%	6.97%	+2.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.57%	9.22%	+3.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.33%	14.32%	+2.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.95%	16.40%	+1.55%

RFFC vs. QUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFFC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than QUS's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFFC vs. QUS - Dividend Comparison

RFFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, less than QUS's 1.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QUS State Street SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF	1.27%	1.38%	1.49%	1.57%	1.68%	1.27%	1.73%	1.81%	2.12%	1.86%	2.07%	1.48%
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF	0.62%	0.78%	1.05%	1.35%	1.41%	0.71%	1.79%	1.34%	1.36%	0.93%	0.66%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFFC and QUS in my portfolio?

RFFC and QUS have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFFC or QUS?

RFFC has higher volatility (3.28%) compared to QUS (2.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFFC dropped -36.26% vs QUS's -33.78%.

Which ETF is better, RFFC or QUS?

On 10-year performance, QUS leads with 13.54% vs 12.66% for RFFC. On fees, QUS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QUS has been the lower-risk option at 2.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFFC or QUS?

Over the 10-year period, QUS has performed better with a 13.54% return vs 12.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFFC or QUS?

QUS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for RFFC.

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

QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.62% for RFFC.

What is the main difference between RFFC and QUS?

They also come from different issuers: SS&C and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RFFC and 0.15% for QUS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 2.03), 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.