RW vs. QMOM

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

RW (Rainwater Equity ETF) and QMOM (Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RW is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Alpha Architect, while QMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RW returned -2.39% vs 17.87% for QMOM. Their 0.67 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RW charges 1.25%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QMOM.

Performance

RW vs. QMOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rainwater Equity ETF (RW) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RW achieves a 1.78% return, which is significantly lower than QMOM's 12.94% return.

RW

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: -1.46%
• 6M: 0.34%
• YTD: 1.78%
• 1Y: -2.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 1.19%

QMOM

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: -2.80%
• 6M: 8.63%
• YTD: 12.94%
• 1Y: 17.87%
• 3Y*: 17.31%
• 5Y*: 9.60%
• 10Y*: 12.30%
• ALL TIME*: 12.12%

*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)
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	$1.43M	$1.49M	$2.25M
RW Rainwater Equity ETF	$44.56K	$41.45K	$44.87K

RW vs. QMOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RW Rainwater Equity ETF	1.78%	-0.44%
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	12.94%	4.97%

Correlation

The correlation between RW and QMOM is 0.67, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.67

The correlation between RW and QMOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

RW vs. QMOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RW	QMOM
Industrials	48.9%	24.6%
Technology	23.5%	20.4%
Financial Services	10.0%	1.9%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	5.8%
Communication Services	3.9%	2.0%
Basic Materials	3.0%	13.5%
Healthcare	2.0%	17.9%
Consumer Defensive	0.2%	2.0%
Utilities	0.2%	2.0%
Real Estate	0.2%	-
Energy	0.1%	15.8%

Return for Risk

RW vs. QMOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RW

RW Risk / Return Rank: 8
RW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
RW Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
RW Omega Ratio Rank: 7
RW Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
RW Martin Ratio Rank: 7

QMOM

QMOM Risk / Return Rank: 31
QMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
QMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
QMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 27
QMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
QMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

RW vs. QMOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rainwater Equity ETF (RW) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). 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.

	RW	QMOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.22	0.63	-0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.21	1.03	-1.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	1.13	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.21	1.27	-1.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.59	3.80	-4.38

RW vs. QMOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RW Sharpe Ratio is -0.22, which is lower than the QMOM Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RW and QMOM, 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

RW vs. QMOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RW drawdown since its inception was -17.04%, smaller than the maximum QMOM drawdown of -39.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RW and QMOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	RW	QMOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.04%	-39.13%	+22.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.02%	-12.76%	-4.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-26.46%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.82%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.34%	-9.73%	+5.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.07%	-12.83%	+7.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.01%	4.26%	+1.75%

Volatility

RW vs. QMOM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Rainwater Equity ETF (RW) is 3.96%, while Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) has a volatility of 7.59%. This indicates that RW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RW	QMOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.96%	7.59%	-3.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.22%	22.16%	-8.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.81%	25.74%	-9.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.48%	24.46%	-8.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.48%	26.72%	-11.24%

RW vs. QMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RW has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than QMOM's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

RW vs. QMOM - Dividend Comparison

RW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.10%, less than QMOM's 0.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	0.48%	0.54%	1.40%	0.87%	1.59%	0.12%	0.08%	0.01%	0.05%	0.13%	0.34%
RW Rainwater Equity ETF	0.10%	0.10%	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 RW and QMOM in my portfolio?

RW and QMOM have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RW or QMOM?

QMOM has higher volatility (7.59%) compared to RW (3.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RW dropped -17.04% vs QMOM's -39.13%.

Which ETF is better, RW or QMOM?

On 1-year performance, QMOM leads with 17.87% vs -2.39% for RW. On fees, QMOM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, RW has been the lower-risk option at 3.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RW or QMOM?

Over the 1-year period, QMOM has performed better with a 17.87% return vs -2.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RW or QMOM?

QMOM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for RW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RW or QMOM?

QMOM has the higher dividend yield at 0.48%, compared with 0.10% for RW.

What is the main difference between RW and QMOM?

RW is categorized as Global Equities, while QMOM is Momentum. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for RW and 0.28% for QMOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.63 vs -0.22), 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.