QDEF vs ULVM
Northern Trust Quality Dividend Defensive ETF vs VictoryShares US Value Momentum ETF
Which is better, QDEF or ULVM?
Nearly the same fund. ULVM costs less.
ULVM has a lower expense ratio. QDEF led over 5Y and the full window, ULVM over 1Y and 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. ULVM is less concentrated, with 13.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.5%.
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 | QDEF | ULVM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.37% | 0.20%Best |
| AUM | $555M | $260M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.60% | 1.81% |
| Holdings | 137 | 126 |
| YTD Return | +12.91% | +13.74%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.44% | +17.70%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.19% | +21.11%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.98%Best | +11.11% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1%Best | 16.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -36.2%Best | -40.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,408Best | $16,934 |
| Top 10 Weight | 36.5% | 13.6%Best |
| Fund Family | Northern Trust Asset Management | Victory Capital Management Inc. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Dec 14, 2012 | Oct 24, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 26, 2017 to Oct 14, 2026 (9 years).
QDEF vs ULVM 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 9 years both funds cover.
QDEF vs ULVM Performance
Northern Trust Quality Dividend Defensive ETF (QDEF) is an ETF from Northern Trust Asset Management and VictoryShares US Value Momentum ETF (ULVM) is an ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc.. Over the past year QDEF returned +16.44% while ULVM returned +17.70%. Year to date, QDEF is up 12.91% versus a gain of 13.74% for ULVM.
Over three years, QDEF compounded at +20.19% per year against +21.11% for ULVM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.98% and +11.11% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, QDEF has the edge at +10.31% annualized vs +9.72%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ULVM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.9% compared with 15.1% for QDEF. 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 -36.2% for QDEF and -40.8% for ULVM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QDEF charges 0.37% per year while ULVM charges 0.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $37 vs $20 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QDEF currently yields 1.60% against 1.81% for ULVM.
Holdings Overlap
17.1% of QDEF's money is in holdings ULVM also owns. 23.8% of ULVM's money is in holdings QDEF also owns.
ULVM and QDEF share little of their money.
29 positions in common, counted across the 154 positions we hold weights for in QDEF and 125 in ULVM, against full books of 137 and 126.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 92 positions for ULVM that do not appear in our book for QDEF (73.4% of the fund), and 121 for QDEF that do not appear in ULVM (80.9%).
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 QDEF | Weight in ULVM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 2.80% | 1.19% | 1.61% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc Cap Stk Cl A | 2.35% | 0.78% | 1.57% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.72% | 0.35% | 1.37% |
| EDConsolidated Edison Inc. | 0.54% | 1.38% | 0.84% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 0.88% | 0.86% | 0.02% |
| EWBCEast West Bancorp, Inc. | 0.51% | 1.08% | 0.57% |
| VICIVici Properties Inc | 0.47% | 1.12% | 0.65% |
| VLOValero Energy Corp. | 0.82% | 0.74% | 0.08% |
| EVRGEvergy Inc Sedol Bfmxgr0 | 0.12% | 1.44% | 1.32% |
| MPCMarathon Petroleum Corp | 0.77% | 0.77% | 0.00% |
23.8% of ULVM is already inside QDEF.
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, QDEF or ULVM?
QDEF has an expense ratio of 0.37% while ULVM charges 0.20%. ULVM is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QDEF or ULVM?
Over the past year QDEF returned +16.44% vs +17.70% for ULVM, so ULVM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), QDEF annualized +10.31% vs +9.72% for ULVM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QDEF or ULVM?
ULVM has been the more volatile fund at 16.9% annualized versus 15.1% for QDEF. Worst drawdown: QDEF -36.2% vs ULVM -40.8%.
Should I hold both QDEF and ULVM?
QDEF and ULVM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, 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 QDEF and ULVM?
23.8% of ULVM's money is in holdings QDEF also owns. 23.8% of ULVM's is in holdings QDEF also owns. They hold 29 positions in common, counted across the 154 positions we hold weights for in QDEF and 125 in ULVM.
Which pays a higher dividend, QDEF or ULVM?
QDEF yields 1.60% while ULVM yields 1.81%, so ULVM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ULVM better than QDEF?
ULVM has a lower expense ratio. QDEF led over 5Y and the full window, ULVM over 1Y and 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. ULVM is less concentrated, with 13.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.