WAMA vs. QGRW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

WAMA (WisdomTree U.S. Adaptive Moving Average Fund) and QGRW (WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - WAMA is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the WisdomTree U.S. Adaptive Moving Average Index, while QGRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. WAMA charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QGRW.

Performance

WAMA vs. QGRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree U.S. Adaptive Moving Average Fund (WAMA) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

WAMA

• 1D: -0.73%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QGRW

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: 9.03%
• YTD: 15.43%
• 6M: 14.57%
• 1Y: 35.66%
• 3Y*: 29.10%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WAMA vs. QGRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
WAMA WisdomTree U.S. Adaptive Moving Average Fund	2.77%
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund	5.70%

Correlation

The correlation between WAMA and QGRW is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2026	0.89

Return for Risk

WAMA vs. QGRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

QGRW

QGRW Risk / Return Rank: 54
QGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
QGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 57
QGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
QGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

WAMA vs. QGRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree U.S. Adaptive Moving Average Fund (WAMA) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	WAMA	QGRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	4.87	1.66	+3.21

Drawdowns

WAMA vs. QGRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WAMA drawdown since its inception was -1.91%, smaller than the maximum QGRW drawdown of -24.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WAMA and QGRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	WAMA	QGRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.91%	-24.40%	+22.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-15.44%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-24.40%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.73%	-1.33%	+0.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.39%	-3.26%	+2.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.94%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	WAMA	QGRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.71%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	13.67%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.20%	17.40%	-8.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.20%	21.08%	-11.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.20%	21.08%	-11.88%

WAMA vs. QGRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

WAMA has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is higher than QGRW's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

WAMA vs. QGRW - Dividend Comparison

WAMA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund	0.07%	0.09%	0.14%	0.11%
WAMA WisdomTree U.S. Adaptive Moving Average Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WAMA and QGRW in my portfolio?

WAMA and QGRW have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, WAMA or QGRW?

On fees, QGRW is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, WAMA or QGRW?

QGRW is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for WAMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WAMA or QGRW?

QGRW has the higher dividend yield at 0.07%, compared with 0.00% for WAMA.

What is the main difference between WAMA and QGRW?

WAMA is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while QGRW is Large Cap Growth Equities. WAMA tracks WisdomTree U.S. Adaptive Moving Average Index, while QGRW tracks WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for WAMA and 0.28% for QGRW.