SAWG vs. SRHQ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

SAWG (AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF) and SRHQ (SRH U.S. Quality ETF) are both Quality Factor funds. SAWG is actively managed, while SRHQ is passively managed. Over the past year, SAWG returned 17.21% vs 31.30% for SRHQ. Their 0.69 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. SAWG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SRHQ.

Performance

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWG) and SRH U.S. Quality ETF (SRHQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SAWG achieves a 8.37% return, which is significantly lower than SRHQ's 20.78% return.

SAWG

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: 0.10%
• 6M: 8.55%
• YTD: 8.37%
• 1Y: 17.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.12%

SRHQ

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 1.86%
• 6M: 18.75%
• YTD: 20.78%
• 1Y: 31.30%
• 3Y*: 17.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 18.88%

*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)
SAWG AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF	$20.88K	$32.12K	$31.74K
SRHQ SRH U.S. Quality ETF	$113.47K	$63.13K	$30.03K

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SAWG AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF	8.37%	11.30%	6.07%
SRHQ SRH U.S. Quality ETF	20.78%	7.34%	3.97%

Correlation

The correlation between SAWG and SRHQ is 0.59, 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.	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2024	0.69

The correlation between SAWG and SRHQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.69 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SAWG	SRHQ
Technology	46.2%	21.9%
Healthcare	15.4%	21.4%
Consumer Cyclical	11.3%	11.3%
Industrials	8.8%	20.4%
Financial Services	7.5%	10.2%
Communication Services	6.9%	2.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	5.2%
Basic Materials	-	2.7%
Energy	-	1.2%
Real Estate	-	1.2%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

SAWG vs. SRHQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SAWG

SAWG Risk / Return Rank: 46
SAWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
SAWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
SAWG Omega Ratio Rank: 45
SAWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
SAWG Martin Ratio Rank: 49

SRHQ

SRHQ Risk / Return Rank: 87
SRHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
SRHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
SRHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 80
SRHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
SRHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWG) and SRH U.S. Quality ETF (SRHQ). 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.

	SAWG	SRHQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.20	1.97	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.72	2.80	-1.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.34	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.40	4.64	-3.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.64	16.85	-11.21

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAWG Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is lower than the SRHQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SAWG and SRHQ, 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

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SAWG drawdown since its inception was -18.68%, roughly equal to the maximum SRHQ drawdown of -18.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAWG and SRHQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SAWG	SRHQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.68%	-18.50%	-0.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.33%	-6.31%	-5.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.50%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.58%	-1.47%	-0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.57%	-2.98%	+0.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.80%	1.74%	+1.06%

Volatility

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWG) is 3.28%, while SRH U.S. Quality ETF (SRHQ) has a volatility of 4.37%. This indicates that SAWG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SRHQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SAWG	SRHQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.28%	4.37%	-1.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.49%	11.10%	-0.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.19%	14.90%	-1.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.05%	15.96%	+0.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.05%	15.96%	+0.09%

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

SAWG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than SRHQ's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

SAWG vs. SRHQ - Dividend Comparison

SAWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.25%, less than SRHQ's 0.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
SAWG AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF	0.25%	0.27%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%
SRHQ SRH U.S. Quality ETF	0.69%	0.76%	0.66%	0.84%	0.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SAWG and SRHQ in my portfolio?

SAWG and SRHQ have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SAWG or SRHQ?

SRHQ has higher volatility (4.37%) compared to SAWG (3.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SAWG dropped -18.68% vs SRHQ's -18.50%.

Which ETF is better, SAWG or SRHQ?

On 1-year performance, SRHQ leads with 31.30% vs 17.21% for SAWG. On fees, SRHQ is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, SAWG has been the lower-risk option at 3.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SAWG or SRHQ?

Over the 1-year period, SRHQ has performed better with a 31.30% return vs 17.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SAWG or SRHQ?

SRHQ is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for SAWG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SAWG or SRHQ?

SRHQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.69%, compared with 0.25% for SAWG.

What is the main difference between SAWG and SRHQ?

They also come from different issuers: AAM and SRH. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for SAWG and 0.35% for SRHQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SRHQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs 1.20), 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.