ALRG vs QLTY
Allspring LT Large Core ETF vs GMO US Quality ETF
Which is better, ALRG or QLTY?
QLTY has been ahead.
ALRG has a lower expense ratio. QLTY led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. QLTY is less concentrated, with 45.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.1%.
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 | ALRG | QLTY |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.28%Best | 0.50% |
| AUM | $8M | $5.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.42% | 0.66% |
| Holdings | 51 | 90 |
| YTD Return | +14.63% | +15.19%Best |
| 1Y Return | +18.42% | +21.45%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.21% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.9%Best | 12.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -9.3%Best | -11.7% |
| $10,000 over 1.3 years | $12,936 | $13,060Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 47.1% | 45.5%Best |
| Fund Family | Allspring Global Investments | GMO |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 8, 2025 | Nov 13, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 8, 2025 to Oct 15, 2026 (1.3 years).
ALRG 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 1.3 years both funds cover.
ALRG vs QLTY Performance
Allspring LT Large Core ETF (ALRG) is an ETF from Allspring Global Investments and GMO US Quality ETF (QLTY) is an ETF from GMO. Over the past year ALRG returned +18.42% while QLTY returned +21.45%. Year to date, ALRG is up 14.63% versus a gain of 15.19% 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 12.3% compared with 11.9% for ALRG. 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 -9.3% for ALRG and -11.7% 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 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ALRG charges 0.28% per year while QLTY charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $28 vs $50 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ALRG currently yields 0.42% against 0.66% for QLTY.
Holdings Overlap
47.1% of ALRG's money is in holdings QLTY also owns. 48.9% of QLTY's money is in holdings ALRG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
15 positions in common, counted across the 50 positions we hold weights for in ALRG and 45 in QLTY, against full books of 51 and 90.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 30 positions for QLTY that do not appear in our book for ALRG (50.8% of the fund), and 29 for ALRG that do not appear in QLTY (42.5%).
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 ALRG | Weight in QLTY | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 7.79% | 8.00% | 0.21% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 8.81% | 4.20% | 4.61% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 5.43% | 3.30% | 2.13% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.79% | 3.50% | 1.29% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.86% | 4.80% | 1.94% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.83% | 3.70% | 0.13% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 1.80% | 4.20% | 2.40% |
| TMOThermo Fisherscientific Inc. | 1.55% | 4.30% | 2.75% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.68% | 2.50% | 0.18% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 2.15% | 2.80% | 0.65% |
48.9% of QLTY is already inside ALRG.
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, ALRG or QLTY?
ALRG has an expense ratio of 0.28% while QLTY charges 0.50%. ALRG is the cheaper option, by $22 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ALRG or QLTY?
Over the past year ALRG returned +18.42% vs +21.45% for QLTY, so QLTY leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), ALRG annualized +21.90% vs +22.80% for QLTY. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ALRG or QLTY?
QLTY has been the more volatile fund at 12.3% annualized versus 11.9% for ALRG. Worst drawdown: ALRG -9.3% vs QLTY -11.7%.
Should I hold both ALRG and QLTY?
ALRG and QLTY have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ALRG and QLTY?
48.9% of QLTY's money is in holdings ALRG also owns. 48.9% of QLTY's is in holdings ALRG also owns. They hold 15 positions in common, counted across the 50 positions we hold weights for in ALRG and 45 in QLTY.
Which pays a higher dividend, ALRG or QLTY?
ALRG yields 0.42% while QLTY yields 0.66%, so QLTY currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QLTY better than ALRG?
ALRG has a lower expense ratio. QLTY led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. QLTY is less concentrated, with 45.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.