NANC vs QLTY
Subversive Congressional Democrats Trading ETF vs GMO US Quality ETF
Which is better, NANC or QLTY?
Each has led over a different period.
QLTY has a lower expense ratio. NANC led over 3Y and the full window, QLTY over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. QLTY is less concentrated, with 44.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.8%.
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 | NANC | QLTY |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.72% | 0.50%Best |
| AUM | $296M | $5.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.18% | 0.70% |
| Holdings | 181 | 90 |
| YTD Return | +15.70%Best | +14.67% |
| 1Y Return | +17.90% | +21.58%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.65%Best | +22.07% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.0% | 11.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -20.9% | -17.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $18,504Best | $17,831 |
| Top 10 Weight | 46.8% | 44.9%Best |
| Fund Family | Subversive Capital | GMO |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 7, 2023 | Nov 13, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
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 13, 2026 (2.9 years).
NANC 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.
NANC vs QLTY Performance
Subversive Congressional Democrats Trading ETF (NANC) is an ETF from Subversive Capital and GMO US Quality ETF (QLTY) is an ETF from GMO. Over the past year NANC returned +17.90% while QLTY returned +21.58%. Year to date, NANC is up 15.70% versus a gain of 14.67% for QLTY.
Over three years, NANC compounded at +24.65% per year against +22.07% for QLTY.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NANC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.0% 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 -20.9% for NANC 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 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
NANC charges 0.72% per year while QLTY charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $72 vs $50 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, NANC currently yields 0.18% against 0.70% for QLTY.
Holdings Overlap
44.2% of NANC's money is in holdings QLTY also owns. 60.7% of QLTY's money is in holdings NANC also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
20 positions in common, counted across the 89 positions we hold weights for in NANC and 44 in QLTY, against full books of 181 and 90.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 24 positions for QLTY that do not appear in our book for NANC (39.3% of the fund), and 66 for NANC that do not appear in QLTY (53.9%).
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 NANC | Weight in QLTY | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.71% | 7.70% | 0.99% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.19% | 2.50% | 5.69% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.54% | 4.80% | 0.26% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.89% | 3.50% | 1.39% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.22% | 4.50% | 2.28% |
| CRMSalesforce Inc Crm Us Equity | 2.84% | 3.40% | 0.56% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.45% | 4.50% | 3.05% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.48% | 2.50% | 0.02% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 2.42% | 2.50% | 0.08% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.03% | 3.50% | 2.47% |
60.7% of QLTY is already inside NANC.
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, NANC or QLTY?
NANC has an expense ratio of 0.72% while QLTY charges 0.50%. QLTY is the cheaper option, by $22 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, NANC or QLTY?
Over the past year NANC returned +17.90% vs +21.58% 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, NANC or QLTY?
NANC has been the more volatile fund at 14.0% annualized versus 11.9% for QLTY. Worst drawdown: NANC -20.9% vs QLTY -17.0%.
Should I hold both NANC and QLTY?
NANC 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 NANC and QLTY?
60.7% of QLTY's money is in holdings NANC also owns. 60.7% of QLTY's is in holdings NANC also owns. They hold 20 positions in common, counted across the 89 positions we hold weights for in NANC and 44 in QLTY.
Which pays a higher dividend, NANC or QLTY?
NANC yields 0.18% while QLTY yields 0.70%, so QLTY currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QLTY better than NANC?
QLTY has a lower expense ratio. NANC led over 3Y and the full window, QLTY over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. QLTY is less concentrated, with 44.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.