CHGX vs QLTY
Stance Sustainable Beta ETF vs GMO US Quality ETF
Which is better, CHGX or QLTY?
QLTY has been ahead.
CHGX has a lower expense ratio. QLTY led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. CHGX is less concentrated, with 11.8% 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 | CHGX | QLTY |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49%Best | 0.50% |
| AUM | $179M | $5.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.55% | 0.66% |
| Holdings | 203 | 90 |
| YTD Return | +21.11%Best | +14.13% |
| 1Y Return | +20.36% | +20.95%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.83% | +21.84%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.53% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 25.6% | 11.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -47.3% | -17.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $10,910 | $17,733Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 11.8%Best | 45.5% |
| Fund Family | STANCE Capital | GMO |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 14, 2024 | 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).
CHGX 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.
CHGX vs QLTY Performance
Stance Sustainable Beta ETF (CHGX) is an ETF from STANCE Capital and GMO US Quality ETF (QLTY) is an ETF from GMO. Over the past year CHGX returned +20.36% while QLTY returned +20.95%. Year to date, CHGX is up 21.11% versus a gain of 14.13% for QLTY.
Over three years, CHGX compounded at +3.83% per year against +21.84% for QLTY.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CHGX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 25.6% compared with 11.9% for QLTY. 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 -47.3% for CHGX 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 0.60. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CHGX charges 0.49% per year while QLTY charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $50 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CHGX currently yields 0.55% against 0.66% for QLTY.
Holdings Overlap
17.9% of CHGX's money is in holdings QLTY also owns. 40.3% of QLTY's money is in holdings CHGX also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
18 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in CHGX and 45 in QLTY, against full books of 203 and 90.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 27 positions for QLTY that do not appear in our book for CHGX (59.4% of the fund), and 83 for CHGX that do not appear in QLTY (82.0%).
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 CHGX | Weight in QLTY | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TMOThermo Fisherscientific Inc. | 1.06% | 4.30% | 3.24% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.99% | 4.20% | 3.21% |
| TXNTexas Instrument Inc | 1.06% | 3.80% | 2.74% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 1.04% | 3.30% | 2.26% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 0.96% | 2.80% | 1.84% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.00% | 2.50% | 1.50% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 0.95% | 2.40% | 1.45% |
| UNHUnitedhealth Group Incorporated | 0.92% | 2.40% | 1.48% |
| ABTAbbot Laboratories | 0.92% | 2.20% | 1.28% |
| SNPSSynopsys | 1.21% | 1.80% | 0.59% |
40.3% of QLTY is already inside CHGX.
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, CHGX or QLTY?
CHGX has an expense ratio of 0.49% while QLTY charges 0.50%. CHGX is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CHGX or QLTY?
Over the past year CHGX returned +20.36% 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, CHGX or QLTY?
CHGX has been the more volatile fund at 25.6% annualized versus 11.9% for QLTY. Worst drawdown: CHGX -47.3% vs QLTY -17.0%.
Should I hold both CHGX and QLTY?
CHGX and QLTY have a monthly-return correlation of 0.60, 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 CHGX and QLTY?
40.3% of QLTY's money is in holdings CHGX also owns. 40.3% of QLTY's is in holdings CHGX also owns. They hold 18 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in CHGX and 45 in QLTY.
Which pays a higher dividend, CHGX or QLTY?
CHGX yields 0.55% while QLTY yields 0.66%, so QLTY currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QLTY better than CHGX?
CHGX has a lower expense ratio. QLTY led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. CHGX is less concentrated, with 11.8% 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.