RNIN vs. QVAL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RNIN (Bushido Capital US SMID Cap Equity ETF) and QVAL (Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF) are both Mid Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RNIN returned 28.56% vs 29.65% for QVAL. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RNIN charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QVAL.

Performance

RNIN vs. QVAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bushido Capital US SMID Cap Equity ETF (RNIN) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RNIN achieves a 15.93% return, which is significantly higher than QVAL's 14.68% return.

RNIN

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: 1.27%
• YTD: 15.93%
• 6M: 14.64%
• 1Y: 28.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QVAL

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 4.34%
• YTD: 14.68%
• 6M: 15.27%
• 1Y: 29.65%
• 3Y*: 21.66%
• 5Y*: 12.15%
• 10Y*: 11.64%

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

RNIN vs. QVAL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RNIN Bushido Capital US SMID Cap Equity ETF	15.93%	10.27%
QVAL Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF	14.68%	10.35%

Correlation

The correlation between RNIN and QVAL is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2025	0.80

The correlation between RNIN and QVAL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RNIN vs. QVAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

RNIN

RNIN Risk / Return Rank: 70
RNIN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
RNIN Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
RNIN Omega Ratio Rank: 56
RNIN Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
RNIN Martin Ratio Rank: 86

QVAL

QVAL Risk / Return Rank: 69
QVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
QVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
QVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 57
QVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
QVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

RNIN vs. QVAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bushido Capital US SMID Cap Equity ETF (RNIN) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL). 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.

	RNIN	QVAL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.93	2.07	-0.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.82	3.21	-0.39
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.35	-0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.04	4.93	+0.10
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	17.82	13.98	+3.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RNIN vs. QVAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RNIN Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is comparable to the QVAL Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RNIN and QVAL, 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

	RNIN	QVAL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.93	2.07	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.56	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.78	0.49	+1.29

Drawdowns

RNIN vs. QVAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RNIN drawdown since its inception was -5.70%, smaller than the maximum QVAL drawdown of -51.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNIN and QVAL.

Drawdown Indicators

	RNIN	QVAL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.70%	-51.49%	+45.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.70%	-6.04%	+0.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.41%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.17%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-51.49%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.55%	-0.78%	-1.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.24%	-7.80%	+6.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.61%	2.13%	-0.52%

Volatility

RNIN vs. QVAL - Volatility Comparison

Bushido Capital US SMID Cap Equity ETF (RNIN) has a higher volatility of 4.94% compared to Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL) at 4.16%. This indicates that RNIN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QVAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RNIN	QVAL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.94%	4.16%	+0.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.50%	10.06%	+0.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.87%	14.44%	+0.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.97%	21.63%	-6.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.97%	22.79%	-7.82%

RNIN vs. QVAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

RNIN has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than QVAL's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

RNIN vs. QVAL - Dividend Comparison

RNIN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%, less than QVAL's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
QVAL Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF	1.46%	1.44%	1.72%	1.76%	2.00%	1.23%	1.86%	1.99%	1.64%	1.08%	1.30%
RNIN Bushido Capital US SMID Cap Equity ETF	0.76%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RNIN and QVAL in my portfolio?

RNIN and QVAL have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RNIN or QVAL?

RNIN has higher volatility (4.94%) compared to QVAL (4.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RNIN dropped -5.70% vs QVAL's -51.49%.

Which ETF is better, RNIN or QVAL?

On 1-year performance, QVAL leads with 29.65% vs 28.56% for RNIN. On fees, QVAL is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QVAL has been the lower-risk option at 4.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RNIN or QVAL?

Over the 1-year period, QVAL has performed better with a 29.65% return vs 28.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RNIN or QVAL?

QVAL is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for RNIN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RNIN or QVAL?

QVAL has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 0.76% for RNIN.

What is the main difference between RNIN and QVAL?

They also come from different issuers: Bushido and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for RNIN and 0.28% for QVAL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.93), 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.