SQLV vs. SMIG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

SQLV (Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF) and SMIG (Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, SQLV returned 13.42%/yr vs 13.57%/yr for SMIG. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

SQLV vs. SMIG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) and Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SQLV achieves a 16.34% return, which is significantly higher than SMIG's 12.95% return.

SQLV

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: 3.63%
• YTD: 16.34%
• 6M: 15.01%
• 1Y: 28.84%
• 3Y*: 13.42%
• 5Y*: 7.15%
• 10Y*: —

SMIG

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.34%
• YTD: 12.95%
• 6M: 11.75%
• 1Y: 14.54%
• 3Y*: 13.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SQLV vs. SMIG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	16.34%	2.50%	4.76%	21.21%	-12.86%	8.68%
SMIG Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF	12.95%	0.78%	17.63%	13.62%	-11.83%	5.23%

Correlation

The correlation between SQLV and SMIG is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021	0.83

The correlation between SQLV and SMIG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

SQLV vs. SMIG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SQLV	SMIG
Financial Services	19.4%	21.1%
Healthcare	18.5%	2.7%
Technology	16.9%	10.7%
Consumer Cyclical	13.2%	13.5%
Industrials	10.9%	18.2%
Consumer Defensive	7.2%	1.9%
Communication Services	4.6%	2.2%
Energy	4.4%	10.4%
Basic Materials	3.4%	2.0%
Real Estate	0.9%	9.8%
Utilities	0.6%	9.8%

Return for Risk

SQLV vs. SMIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

SQLV

SQLV Risk / Return Rank: 56
SQLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
SQLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
SQLV Omega Ratio Rank: 46
SQLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
SQLV Martin Ratio Rank: 59

SMIG

SMIG Risk / Return Rank: 36
SMIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
SMIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
SMIG Omega Ratio Rank: 34
SMIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
SMIG Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

SQLV vs. SMIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) and Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG). 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.

	SQLV	SMIG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.64	1.22	+0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.40	1.86	+0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.21	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.28	1.71	+1.56
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.82	4.45	+5.36

SQLV vs. SMIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SQLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is higher than the SMIG Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SQLV and SMIG, 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

SQLV vs. SMIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SQLV drawdown since its inception was -48.34%, which is greater than SMIG's maximum drawdown of -19.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SQLV and SMIG.

Drawdown Indicators

	SQLV	SMIG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.34%	-19.65%	-28.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.84%	-8.52%	-0.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.86%	-19.23%	-7.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.96%	-0.15%	-0.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.90%	-6.48%	-2.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.95%	3.27%	-0.32%

Volatility

SQLV vs. SMIG - Volatility Comparison

Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) has a higher volatility of 4.55% compared to Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG) at 3.60%. This indicates that SQLV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SMIG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SQLV	SMIG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.55%	3.60%	+0.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.56%	8.48%	+3.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.69%	12.05%	+5.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.98%	16.16%	+4.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.32%	16.16%	+7.16%

SQLV vs. SMIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both SQLV and SMIG have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

SQLV vs. SMIG - Dividend Comparison

SQLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than SMIG's 1.71% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SMIG Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF	1.71%	1.82%	1.75%	1.91%	2.00%	0.50%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF	1.01%	1.15%	1.11%	1.09%	1.24%	1.12%	1.22%	1.20%	1.08%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SQLV and SMIG in my portfolio?

SQLV and SMIG have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SQLV or SMIG?

SQLV has higher volatility (4.55%) compared to SMIG (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SQLV dropped -48.34% vs SMIG's -19.65%.

Which ETF is better, SQLV or SMIG?

On 3-year performance, SMIG leads with 13.57% vs 13.42% for SQLV. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, SMIG has been the lower-risk option at 3.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SQLV or SMIG?

Over the 3-year period, SMIG has performed better with a 13.57% return vs 13.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SQLV or SMIG?

SQLV and SMIG have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SQLV or SMIG?

SMIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.71%, compared with 1.01% for SQLV.

What is the main difference between SQLV and SMIG?

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Bahl & Gaynor.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SQLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.64 vs 1.22), 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.