RW vs. QVAL

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

RW (Rainwater Equity ETF) and QVAL (Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RW is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Alpha Architect, while QVAL is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RW returned -2.39% vs 39.46% for QVAL. Their 0.48 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. RW charges 1.25%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QVAL.

Performance

RW vs. QVAL - 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 Value ETF (QVAL). 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 QVAL's 20.72% return.

RW

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

QVAL

• 1D: -0.54%
• 1M: 3.77%
• 6M: 14.38%
• YTD: 20.72%
• 1Y: 39.46%
• 3Y*: 18.55%
• 5Y*: 12.93%
• 10Y*: 11.94%
• ALL TIME*: 11.53%

*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)
QVAL Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF	$1.37M	$1.75M	$1.48M
RW Rainwater Equity ETF	$44.56K	$41.45K	$44.87K

RW vs. QVAL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RW Rainwater Equity ETF	1.78%	-0.44%
QVAL Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF	20.72%	13.08%

Correlation

The correlation between RW and QVAL is 0.51, 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.	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.48

The correlation between RW and QVAL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

RW vs. QVAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RW	QVAL
Industrials	48.9%	12.3%
Technology	23.5%	10.0%
Financial Services	10.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	21.6%
Communication Services	3.9%	5.8%
Basic Materials	3.0%	8.0%
Healthcare	2.0%	14.1%
Consumer Defensive	0.2%	5.9%
Utilities	0.2%	2.0%
Real Estate	0.2%	2.0%
Energy	0.1%	20.3%

Return for Risk

RW vs. QVAL — 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

QVAL

QVAL Risk / Return Rank: 94
QVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
QVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
QVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 92
QVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
QVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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. QVAL - 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 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.

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	QVAL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.22	2.60	-2.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.21	3.92	-4.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	1.44	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.21	6.18	-6.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.59	19.14	-19.73

RW vs. QVAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RW Sharpe Ratio is -0.22, which is lower than the QVAL Sharpe Ratio of 2.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RW 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.

Drawdowns

RW vs. QVAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RW drawdown since its inception was -17.04%, smaller than the maximum QVAL drawdown of -51.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RW and QVAL.

Drawdown Indicators

	RW	QVAL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.04%	-51.49%	+34.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.02%	-6.04%	-10.98%
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	-4.34%	-1.04%	-3.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.07%	-7.69%	+2.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.01%	1.95%	+4.06%

Volatility

RW vs. QVAL - Volatility Comparison

Rainwater Equity ETF (RW) has a higher volatility of 3.96% compared to Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL) at 3.51%. This indicates that RW'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

	RW	QVAL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.96%	3.51%	+0.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.22%	10.20%	+3.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.81%	14.34%	+1.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.48%	21.56%	-6.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.48%	22.70%	-7.22%

RW vs. QVAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

RW vs. QVAL - Dividend Comparison

RW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.10%, less than QVAL's 1.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
QVAL Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF	1.42%	1.44%	1.72%	1.76%	2.00%	1.23%	1.86%	1.99%	1.64%	1.08%	1.30%
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 QVAL in my portfolio?

RW and QVAL have a correlation of 0.51, 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 QVAL?

RW has higher volatility (3.96%) compared to QVAL (3.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RW dropped -17.04% vs QVAL's -51.49%.

Which ETF is better, RW or QVAL?

On 1-year performance, QVAL leads with 39.46% vs -2.39% for RW. On fees, QVAL is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QVAL has been the lower-risk option at 3.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RW or QVAL?

Over the 1-year period, QVAL has performed better with a 39.46% 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 QVAL?

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

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

QVAL has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 0.10% for RW.

What is the main difference between RW and QVAL?

RW is categorized as Global Equities, while QVAL is Mid Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for RW and 0.28% for QVAL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 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.