STNC vs. OUSA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

STNC (Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF) and OUSA (OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. STNC is actively managed, while OUSA is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, STNC returned 8.11%/yr vs 8.53%/yr for OUSA. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. STNC charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for OUSA.

Performance

STNC vs. OUSA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF (STNC) and OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, STNC achieves a 13.06% return, which is significantly higher than OUSA's 0.48% return.

STNC

• 1D: -1.64%
• 1M: 3.18%
• YTD: 13.06%
• 6M: 12.47%
• 1Y: 24.99%
• 3Y*: 13.47%
• 5Y*: 8.11%
• 10Y*: —

OUSA

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: -2.32%
• YTD: 0.48%
• 6M: -0.06%
• 1Y: 10.34%
• 3Y*: 11.93%
• 5Y*: 8.53%
• 10Y*: 10.19%

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

STNC vs. OUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
STNC Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF	13.06%	10.33%	8.92%	11.49%	-13.10%	17.04%
OUSA OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF	0.48%	10.23%	17.09%	13.44%	-9.33%	21.26%

Correlation

The correlation between STNC and OUSA is 0.68, 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	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2021	0.85

The correlation between STNC and OUSA shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (1 year) to 0.86 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

STNC vs. OUSA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	STNC	OUSA
Technology	24.9%	26.1%
Consumer Cyclical	19.5%	12.7%
Healthcare	12.9%	13.8%
Industrials	11.4%	11.2%
Consumer Defensive	7.2%	7.3%
Financial Services	6.3%	18.0%
Communication Services	6.3%	10.9%
Utilities	4.6%	-
Basic Materials	3.9%	-
Real Estate	3.0%	-
Energy	-	-

Return for Risk

STNC vs. OUSA — Risk / Return Rank

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

STNC

STNC Risk / Return Rank: 60
STNC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
STNC Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
STNC Omega Ratio Rank: 51
STNC Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
STNC Martin Ratio Rank: 64

OUSA

OUSA Risk / Return Rank: 29
OUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
OUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
OUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 28
OUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
OUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

STNC vs. OUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF (STNC) and OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA). 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.

	STNC	OUSA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	1.06	+0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.57	1.60	+0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.19	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.10	1.24	+1.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.66	4.37	+6.30

STNC vs. OUSA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current STNC Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is higher than the OUSA Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of STNC and OUSA, 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

STNC vs. OUSA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum STNC drawdown since its inception was -22.33%, smaller than the maximum OUSA drawdown of -33.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for STNC and OUSA.

Drawdown Indicators

	STNC	OUSA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.33%	-33.12%	+10.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.09%	-8.36%	+0.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.90%	-13.14%	-4.76%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.33%	-19.54%	-2.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.64%	-3.14%	+1.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.87%	-3.52%	-2.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.35%	2.37%	-0.02%

Volatility

STNC vs. OUSA - Volatility Comparison

Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF (STNC) has a higher volatility of 5.87% compared to OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA) at 2.92%. This indicates that STNC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OUSA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	STNC	OUSA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.87%	2.92%	+2.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.47%	7.42%	+4.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.33%	9.82%	+4.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.67%	13.31%	+2.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.48%	15.17%	+0.31%

STNC vs. OUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison

STNC has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than OUSA's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

STNC vs. OUSA - Dividend Comparison

STNC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than OUSA's 1.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
OUSA OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF	1.43%	1.39%	1.50%	1.81%	1.92%	1.56%	2.03%	2.31%	3.06%	2.15%	2.32%	1.17%
STNC Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF	0.90%	1.02%	0.96%	0.08%	0.58%	0.41%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both STNC and OUSA in my portfolio?

STNC and OUSA have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, STNC or OUSA?

STNC has higher volatility (5.87%) compared to OUSA (2.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, STNC dropped -22.33% vs OUSA's -33.12%.

Which ETF is better, STNC or OUSA?

On 5-year performance, OUSA leads with 8.53% vs 8.11% for STNC. On fees, OUSA is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, OUSA has been the lower-risk option at 2.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, STNC or OUSA?

Over the 5-year period, OUSA has performed better with a 8.53% return vs 8.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, STNC or OUSA?

OUSA is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for STNC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, STNC or OUSA?

OUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.90% for STNC.

What is the main difference between STNC and OUSA?

They also come from different issuers: Red Gate Advisers LLC and O'Shares Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for STNC and 0.48% for OUSA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

STNC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.06), 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.