MNA vs QAI
NYLIM Merger Arbitrage ETF vs NYLIM Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF
Which is better, MNA or QAI?
QAI has been ahead.
MNA has a lower expense ratio. QAI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. MNA is less concentrated, with 35.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 68.5%.
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 | MNA | QAI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.78%Best | 0.81% |
| AUM | $259M | $1.0B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.40% |
| Holdings | 98 | 129 |
| YTD Return | +2.31% | +6.11%Best |
| 1Y Return | +2.63% | +7.83%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.46% | +7.92%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.44% | +3.85%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.8%Best | 5.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -16.7% | -14.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,281 | $12,079Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 35.4%Best | 68.5% |
| Fund Family | New York Life Investments | New York Life Investments |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Nov 17, 2009 | Mar 25, 2009 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 17, 2009 to Oct 14, 2026 (16.9 years).
MNA vs QAI 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 16.9 years both funds cover.
MNA vs QAI Performance
NYLIM Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) is an ETF from New York Life Investments and NYLIM Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF (QAI) is an ETF from New York Life Investments. Over the past year MNA returned +2.63% while QAI returned +7.83%. Year to date, MNA is up 2.31% versus a gain of 6.11% for QAI.
Over three years, MNA compounded at +5.46% per year against +7.92% for QAI; over five years the annualized figures are +2.44% and +3.85% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, QAI has the edge at +2.83% annualized vs +2.67%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QAI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 5.2% compared with 4.8% for MNA. 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 -16.7% for MNA and -14.9% for QAI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.42. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MNA charges 0.78% per year while QAI charges 0.81%. On a $10,000 position that is $78 vs $81 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MNA currently yields 0.00% against 1.40% for QAI.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 51 holdings in MNA and 32 in QAI, totalling 100.2% and 99.6% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in MNA and 32 in QAI, against full books of 98 and 129.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 32 positions for QAI that do not appear in our book for MNA (99.6% of the fund), and 37 for MNA that do not appear in QAI (78.0%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of MNA and QAI you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, MNA or QAI?
MNA has an expense ratio of 0.78% while QAI charges 0.81%. MNA is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, MNA or QAI?
Over the past year MNA returned +2.63% vs +7.83% for QAI, so QAI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), MNA annualized +2.67% vs +2.83% for QAI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, MNA or QAI?
QAI has been the more volatile fund at 5.2% annualized versus 4.8% for MNA. Worst drawdown: MNA -16.7% vs QAI -14.9%.
Should I hold both MNA and QAI?
MNA and QAI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.42, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, MNA or QAI?
MNA yields 0.00% while QAI yields 1.40%, so QAI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QAI better than MNA?
MNA has a lower expense ratio. QAI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. MNA is less concentrated, with 35.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 68.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.