PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
USML vs. QULL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

USML vs. QULL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, USML achieves a 0.78% return, which is significantly lower than QULL's 13.30% return.


USML

1D
-0.92%
1M
2.21%
YTD
0.78%
6M
2.17%
1Y
0.57%
3Y*
15.45%
5Y*
7.63%
10Y*

QULL

1D
0.56%
1M
3.06%
YTD
13.30%
6M
14.07%
1Y
34.31%
3Y*
32.06%
5Y*
15.94%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

USML vs. QULL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
USML
ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN
0.78%9.33%23.97%11.37%-22.87%42.12%
QULL
ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN
13.30%17.61%38.03%57.07%-42.00%51.36%

Correlation

The correlation between USML and QULL is 0.61, 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

0.61

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.69

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021

0.79

The correlation between USML and QULL shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (1 year) to 0.79 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

USML vs. QULL — Risk / Return Rank

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

USML
USML Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
USML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USML Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
USML Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
USML Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
USML Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank

QULL
QULL Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
QULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
QULL Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
QULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
QULL Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

USML vs. QULL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL). 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.


USMLQULLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.02

1.25

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.04

1.87

-1.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.13

8.27

-8.14

USML vs. QULL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USML Sharpe Ratio is 0.03, which is lower than the QULL Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USML and QULL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


USMLQULLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.03

1.41

-1.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.45

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.55

-0.13

Drawdowns

USML vs. QULL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USML drawdown since its inception was -35.34%, smaller than the maximum QULL drawdown of -51.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USML and QULL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


USMLQULLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.34%

-51.83%

+16.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.09%

-18.43%

+5.34%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.14%

-36.82%

+17.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.34%

-51.83%

+16.49%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.74%

-1.70%

-4.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.40%

-14.03%

+3.63%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.36%

4.16%

+0.20%

Volatility

USML vs. QULL - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL) have volatilities of 4.70% and 4.67%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


USMLQULLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.70%

4.67%

+0.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.61%

18.88%

-7.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.45%

24.52%

-8.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.48%

35.62%

-11.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.28%

35.12%

-10.84%

USML vs. QULL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both USML and QULL have an expense ratio of 0.95%.


Dividends

USML vs. QULL - Dividend Comparison

Neither USML nor QULL has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


USML and QULL have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

USML has higher volatility (4.70%) compared to QULL (4.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, USML dropped -35.34% vs QULL's -51.83%.

On 5-year performance, QULL leads with 15.94% vs 7.63% for USML. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QULL has performed better with a 15.94% return vs 7.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

USML and QULL have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

USML and QULL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

USML tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index, while QULL tracks MSCI USA Sector Neutral Quality Index.

QULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 0.03), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for USML and QULL

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer