CZA vs. USMF
CZA (Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF) and USMF (WisdomTree US Multifactor Fund) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - CZA tracks the Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index while USMF tracks the WisdomTree US Multifactor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CZA returned 6.64%/yr vs 7.67%/yr for USMF. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CZA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for USMF.
Performance
CZA vs. USMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CZA achieves a 5.97% return, which is significantly higher than USMF's 4.36% return.
CZA
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 1.90%
- YTD
- 5.97%
- 6M
- 6.65%
- 1Y
- 13.18%
- 3Y*
- 12.55%
- 5Y*
- 6.64%
- 10Y*
- 10.10%
USMF
- 1D
- -0.56%
- 1M
- 3.76%
- YTD
- 4.36%
- 6M
- 4.80%
- 1Y
- 6.28%
- 3Y*
- 14.13%
- 5Y*
- 7.67%
- 10Y*
- —
CZA vs. USMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF | 5.97% | 8.31% | 12.14% | 7.00% | -5.91% | 27.42% | 0.35% | 32.27% | -8.89% | 8.37% |
USMF WisdomTree US Multifactor Fund | 4.36% | 4.60% | 19.65% | 13.47% | -8.82% | 21.26% | 12.01% | 24.06% | -4.72% | 11.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between CZA and USMF is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2017 | 0.86 |
The correlation between CZA and USMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (1 year) to 0.90 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CZA vs. USMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CZA
USMF
Financial Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
-
Financial Services
CZA
USMF
Industrials
CZA
USMF
Healthcare
CZA
USMF
Utilities
CZA
USMF
Real Estate
CZA
USMF
Technology
CZA
USMF
Consumer Cyclical
CZA
USMF
Basic Materials
CZA
USMF
Consumer Defensive
CZA
USMF
Energy
CZA
USMF
Communication Services
CZA
-
USMF
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CZA vs. USMF — Risk / Return Rank
CZA
USMF
CZA vs. USMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and WisdomTree US Multifactor Fund (USMF). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| CZA | USMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.10 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.44 | 0.98 | +0.46 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.48 | 2.93 | +2.56 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CZA | USMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.04 | 0.58 | +0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 | 0.54 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.63 | -0.15 |
Drawdowns
CZA vs. USMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CZA drawdown since its inception was -53.20%, which is greater than USMF's maximum drawdown of -36.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZA and USMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CZA | USMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.20% | -36.24% | -16.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.21% | -6.47% | -2.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.92% | -15.39% | -3.53% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.92% | -18.10% | -0.82% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.18% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.78% | -0.56% | -0.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.88% | -4.16% | -2.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.41% | 2.15% | +0.26% |
Volatility
CZA vs. USMF - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) has a higher volatility of 3.13% compared to WisdomTree US Multifactor Fund (USMF) at 2.30%. This indicates that CZA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CZA | USMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.13% | 2.30% | +0.83% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.30% | 7.43% | +1.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.78% | 10.79% | +1.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.14% | 14.27% | +1.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.28% | 16.97% | +2.31% |
CZA vs. USMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CZA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than USMF's 0.28% expense ratio.
Dividends
CZA vs. USMF - Dividend Comparison
CZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, more than USMF's 1.32% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF | 1.47% | 1.56% | 1.27% | 1.36% | 1.71% | 0.89% | 1.42% | 1.40% | 1.27% | 1.10% | 1.87% | 1.37% |
USMF WisdomTree US Multifactor Fund | 1.32% | 1.37% | 1.22% | 1.33% | 1.74% | 1.42% | 1.34% | 1.38% | 1.45% | 0.67% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CZA and USMF have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CZA has higher volatility (3.13%) compared to USMF (2.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CZA dropped -53.20% vs USMF's -36.24%.
On 5-year performance, USMF leads with 7.67% vs 6.64% for CZA. On fees, USMF is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, USMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, USMF has performed better with a 7.67% return vs 6.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
USMF is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CZA.
CZA has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 1.32% for USMF.
CZA tracks Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index, while USMF tracks WisdomTree US Multifactor Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CZA and 0.28% for USMF.
CZA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.04 vs 0.58), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for CZA and USMF
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer