TGRT vs. QWLD

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

TGRT (T. Rowe Price Growth ETF) and QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. TGRT is actively managed, while QWLD is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TGRT returned 21.32%/yr vs 16.43%/yr for QWLD. Their 0.71 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. TGRT charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for QWLD.

Performance

TGRT vs. QWLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T. Rowe Price Growth ETF (TGRT) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TGRT achieves a 3.43% return, which is significantly lower than QWLD's 10.03% return.

TGRT

• 1D: 2.23%
• 1M: 1.12%
• 6M: 5.38%
• YTD: 3.43%
• 1Y: 12.76%
• 3Y*: 21.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.01%

QWLD

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 2.22%
• 6M: 5.89%
• YTD: 10.03%
• 1Y: 19.80%
• 3Y*: 16.43%
• 5Y*: 10.04%
• 10Y*: 11.64%
• ALL TIME*: 10.53%

*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)
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	$247.86K	$289.30K	$1.06M
TGRT T. Rowe Price Growth ETF	$4.04M	$3.96M	$7.46M

TGRT vs. QWLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TGRT T. Rowe Price Growth ETF	3.43%	16.94%	32.85%	13.15%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	10.03%	17.93%	14.44%	8.07%

Correlation

The correlation between TGRT and QWLD is 0.67, 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.	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2023	0.71

The correlation between TGRT and QWLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

TGRT vs. QWLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TGRT	QWLD
Technology	53.5%	24.9%
Communication Services	15.8%	9.5%
Healthcare	8.5%	13.2%
Consumer Cyclical	7.6%	6.3%
Industrials	7.2%	10.9%
Financial Services	5.9%	16.5%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	8.1%
Utilities	0.5%	3.8%
Basic Materials	0.2%	2.5%
Energy	0.2%	3.4%
Real Estate	-	1.0%

Return for Risk

TGRT vs. QWLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

TGRT

TGRT Risk / Return Rank: 27
TGRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
TGRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
TGRT Omega Ratio Rank: 28
TGRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
TGRT Martin Ratio Rank: 27

QWLD

QWLD Risk / Return Rank: 81
QWLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
QWLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
QWLD Omega Ratio Rank: 83
QWLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
QWLD Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

TGRT vs. QWLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Growth ETF (TGRT) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). 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.

	TGRT	QWLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.73	2.06	-1.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.11	2.91	-1.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.37	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.72	2.60	-1.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.20	11.35	-9.16

TGRT vs. QWLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TGRT Sharpe Ratio is 0.73, which is lower than the QWLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TGRT and QWLD, 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

TGRT vs. QWLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TGRT drawdown since its inception was -22.04%, smaller than the maximum QWLD drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TGRT and QWLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	TGRT	QWLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.04%	-31.89%	+9.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.89%	-7.66%	-10.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.04%	-12.40%	-9.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.84%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-31.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.69%	0.00%	-3.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.36%	-3.66%	+0.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.82%	1.75%	+4.07%

Volatility

TGRT vs. QWLD - Volatility Comparison

T. Rowe Price Growth ETF (TGRT) has a higher volatility of 5.53% compared to SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) at 2.28%. This indicates that TGRT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QWLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TGRT	QWLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.53%	2.28%	+3.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.34%	7.74%	+6.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.69%	9.70%	+7.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.22%	13.51%	+5.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.22%	15.12%	+4.10%

TGRT vs. QWLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

TGRT has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than QWLD's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

TGRT vs. QWLD - Dividend Comparison

TGRT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%, less than QWLD's 1.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	1.78%	1.85%	1.74%	1.78%	2.02%	1.77%	1.77%	2.13%	2.33%	2.73%	2.22%	3.42%
TGRT T. Rowe Price Growth ETF	0.08%	0.08%	0.09%	0.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TGRT and QWLD in my portfolio?

TGRT and QWLD have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TGRT or QWLD?

TGRT has higher volatility (5.53%) compared to QWLD (2.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TGRT dropped -22.04% vs QWLD's -31.89%.

Which ETF is better, TGRT or QWLD?

On 3-year performance, TGRT leads with 21.32% vs 16.43% for QWLD. On fees, QWLD is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TGRT or QWLD?

Over the 3-year period, TGRT has performed better with a 21.32% return vs 16.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TGRT or QWLD?

QWLD is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for TGRT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TGRT or QWLD?

QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.78%, compared with 0.08% for TGRT.

What is the main difference between TGRT and QWLD?

They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for TGRT and 0.30% for QWLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QWLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 0.73), 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.