AFLG vs QLTY
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF vs GMO US Quality ETF
Which is better, AFLG or QLTY?
Each has led over a different period.
QLTY has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 3Y and the full window, QLTY over 1Y. AFLG is less concentrated, with 33.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 45.5%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AFLG | QLTY |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.50%Best |
| AUM | $803M | $5.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.71% | 0.66% |
| Holdings | 435 | 90 |
| YTD Return | +14.82%Best | +14.13% |
| 1Y Return | +17.70% | +20.95%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.47%Best | +21.84% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.74% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.5%Best | 11.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -17.5% | -17.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $17,746Best | $17,733 |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.0%Best | 45.5% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | GMO |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2019 | Nov 13, 2023 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 15, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.9 years).
AFLG vs QLTY growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.9 years both funds cover.
AFLG vs QLTY Performance
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and GMO US Quality ETF (QLTY) is an ETF from GMO. Over the past year AFLG returned +17.70% while QLTY returned +20.95%. Year to date, AFLG is up 14.82% versus a gain of 14.13% for QLTY.
Over three years, AFLG compounded at +22.47% per year against +21.84% for QLTY.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QLTY has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 11.9% compared with 11.5% for AFLG. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -17.5% for AFLG and -17.0% for QLTY. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFLG charges 0.55% per year while QLTY charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $50 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFLG currently yields 0.71% against 0.66% for QLTY.
Holdings Overlap
36.6% of AFLG's money is in holdings QLTY also owns. 68.2% of QLTY's money is in holdings AFLG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
23 positions in common, counted across the 218 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 45 in QLTY, against full books of 435 and 90.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 22 positions for QLTY that do not appear in our book for AFLG (31.5% of the fund), and 191 for AFLG that do not appear in QLTY (61.6%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in AFLG | Weight in QLTY | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.00% | 8.00% | 4.00% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 7.85% | 3.30% | 4.55% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.58% | 4.20% | 2.38% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 5.62% | 4.90% | 0.72% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.50% | 3.70% | 1.20% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.37% | 3.50% | 1.13% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 0.79% | 4.80% | 4.01% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 0.96% | 4.20% | 3.24% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 0.62% | 4.10% | 3.48% |
| TXNTexas Instrument Inc | 0.33% | 3.80% | 3.47% |
68.2% of QLTY is already inside AFLG.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AFLG or QLTY?
AFLG has an expense ratio of 0.55% while QLTY charges 0.50%. QLTY is the cheaper option, by $5 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFLG or QLTY?
Over the past year AFLG returned +17.70% vs +20.95% for QLTY, so QLTY leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFLG or QLTY?
QLTY has been the more volatile fund at 11.9% annualized versus 11.5% for AFLG. Worst drawdown: AFLG -17.5% vs QLTY -17.0%.
Should I hold both AFLG and QLTY?
AFLG and QLTY have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between AFLG and QLTY?
68.2% of QLTY's money is in holdings AFLG also owns. 68.2% of QLTY's is in holdings AFLG also owns. They hold 23 positions in common, counted across the 218 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 45 in QLTY.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFLG or QLTY?
AFLG yields 0.71% while QLTY yields 0.66%, so AFLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QLTY better than AFLG?
QLTY has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 3Y and the full window, QLTY over 1Y. AFLG is less concentrated, with 33.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 45.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.