PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RSMC vs. FLQS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RSMC vs. FLQS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rockefeller U.S. Small-Mid Cap ETF (RSMC) and Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSMC achieves a 10.85% return, which is significantly higher than FLQS's 6.14% return.


RSMC

1D
-0.07%
1M
2.49%
YTD
10.85%
6M
8.72%
1Y
10.02%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FLQS

1D
-0.81%
1M
0.12%
YTD
6.14%
6M
5.99%
1Y
13.84%
3Y*
11.59%
5Y*
5.27%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RSMC vs. FLQS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
RSMC
Rockefeller U.S. Small-Mid Cap ETF
10.85%-1.02%0.68%
FLQS
Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF
6.14%5.04%-0.87%

Correlation

The correlation between RSMC and FLQS is 0.89, 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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2024

0.89

The correlation between RSMC and FLQS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

RSMC vs. FLQS — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSMC
RSMC Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
RSMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSMC Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
RSMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSMC Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

FLQS
FLQS Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
FLQS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLQS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLQS Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
FLQS Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLQS Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RSMC vs. FLQS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rockefeller U.S. Small-Mid Cap ETF (RSMC) and Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS). 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.


RSMCFLQSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.17

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.96

1.54

-0.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.87

4.55

-1.67

RSMC vs. FLQS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSMC Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is lower than the FLQS Sharpe Ratio of 0.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSMC and FLQS, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RSMCFLQSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.59

0.91

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.31

0.38

-0.07

Drawdowns

RSMC vs. FLQS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSMC drawdown since its inception was -22.33%, smaller than the maximum FLQS drawdown of -42.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSMC and FLQS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RSMCFLQSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.33%

-42.16%

+19.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.49%

-9.00%

-1.49%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.03%

-1.33%

-0.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.26%

-8.02%

+2.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.50%

3.05%

+0.45%

Volatility

RSMC vs. FLQS - Volatility Comparison

Rockefeller U.S. Small-Mid Cap ETF (RSMC) has a higher volatility of 4.81% compared to Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS) at 4.09%. This indicates that RSMC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLQS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RSMCFLQSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.81%

4.09%

+0.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.36%

10.26%

+2.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.16%

15.22%

+1.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.38%

19.24%

+1.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.38%

21.68%

-1.30%

RSMC vs. FLQS - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSMC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than FLQS's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

RSMC vs. FLQS - Dividend Comparison

RSMC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FLQS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLQS
Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF
1.35%1.16%1.29%1.75%1.40%0.95%1.20%1.41%1.27%1.02%
RSMC
Rockefeller U.S. Small-Mid Cap ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RSMC and FLQS have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RSMC has higher volatility (4.81%) compared to FLQS (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSMC dropped -22.33% vs FLQS's -42.16%.

On 1-year performance, FLQS leads with 13.84% vs 10.02% for RSMC. On fees, FLQS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FLQS has been the lower-risk option at 4.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FLQS has performed better with a 13.84% return vs 10.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLQS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for RSMC.

FLQS has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.00% for RSMC.

They also come from different issuers: Rockefeller and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for RSMC and 0.35% for FLQS.

FLQS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.91 vs 0.59), 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 RSMC and FLQS

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