STNC vs. QCLR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

STNC (Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF) and QCLR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - STNC is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Red Gate Advisers LLC, while QCLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Collar 95-110 Index. STNC is actively managed, while QCLR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, STNC returned 13.47%/yr vs 13.86%/yr for QCLR. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. STNC charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLR.

Performance

STNC vs. QCLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF (STNC) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR). 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 QCLR's 0.21% return.

STNC

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

QCLR

• 1D: -1.44%
• 1M: -0.86%
• YTD: 0.21%
• 6M: -0.60%
• 1Y: 9.10%
• 3Y*: 13.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

STNC vs. QCLR - 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%	5.66%
QCLR Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF	0.21%	11.27%	20.27%	28.87%	-18.87%	2.29%

Correlation

The correlation between STNC and QCLR is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021	0.59

The correlation between STNC and QCLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

STNC vs. QCLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	STNC	QCLR
Technology	24.9%	58.7%
Consumer Cyclical	19.5%	11.4%
Healthcare	12.9%	3.7%
Industrials	11.4%	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	7.2%	6.4%
Financial Services	6.3%	0.2%
Communication Services	6.3%	14.3%
Utilities	4.6%	1.2%
Basic Materials	3.9%	1.0%
Real Estate	3.0%	0.1%
Energy	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

STNC vs. QCLR — 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

QCLR

QCLR Risk / Return Rank: 25
QCLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
QCLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
QCLR Omega Ratio Rank: 27
QCLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
QCLR Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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. QCLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF (STNC) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR). 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	QCLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	0.95	+0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.57	1.30	+1.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.18	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.10	0.89	+2.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.66	3.21	+7.46

STNC vs. QCLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current STNC Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is higher than the QCLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of STNC and QCLR, 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. QCLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum STNC drawdown since its inception was -22.33%, roughly equal to the maximum QCLR drawdown of -21.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for STNC and QCLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	STNC	QCLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.33%	-21.77%	-0.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.09%	-10.22%	+2.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.90%	-13.58%	-4.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.33%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.64%	-2.05%	+0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.87%	-6.14%	+0.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.35%	2.84%	-0.49%

Volatility

STNC vs. QCLR - Volatility Comparison

Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF (STNC) has a higher volatility of 5.87% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) at 1.58%. This indicates that STNC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QCLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	STNC	QCLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.87%	1.58%	+4.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.47%	6.59%	+4.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.33%	9.68%	+4.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.67%	12.38%	+3.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.48%	12.38%	+3.10%

STNC vs. QCLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

STNC has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than QCLR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

STNC vs. QCLR - Dividend Comparison

STNC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than QCLR's 14.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QCLR Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF	14.86%	14.89%	8.89%	0.47%	0.27%	1.64%
STNC Stance Equity ESG Large Cap Core ETF	0.90%	1.02%	0.96%	0.08%	0.58%	0.41%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both STNC and QCLR in my portfolio?

STNC and QCLR have a correlation of 0.53, 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 QCLR?

STNC has higher volatility (5.87%) compared to QCLR (1.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, STNC dropped -22.33% vs QCLR's -21.77%.

Which ETF is better, STNC or QCLR?

On 3-year performance, QCLR leads with 13.86% vs 13.47% for STNC. On fees, QCLR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QCLR has been the lower-risk option at 1.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, STNC or QCLR?

Over the 3-year period, QCLR has performed better with a 13.86% return vs 13.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, STNC or QCLR?

QCLR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for STNC.

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

QCLR has the higher dividend yield at 14.86%, compared with 0.90% for STNC.

What is the main difference between STNC and QCLR?

STNC is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QCLR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Red Gate Advisers LLC and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for STNC and 0.60% for QCLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

STNC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 0.95), 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.