CZA vs. VFMV
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV).
CZA and VFMV are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CZA is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index. It was launched on Apr 2, 2007. VFMV is an actively managed fund by Vanguard. It was launched on Feb 13, 2018.
Performance
CZA vs. VFMV - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
CZA vs. VFMV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF | 0.36% | 8.31% | 12.14% | 7.00% | -5.91% | 27.42% | 0.35% | 32.27% | -8.85% |
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF | 2.90% | 10.52% | 16.91% | 8.86% | -5.73% | 20.75% | -0.19% | 27.26% | -1.10% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CZA achieves a 0.36% return, which is significantly lower than VFMV's 2.90% return.
CZA
- 1D
- 0.96%
- 1M
- -6.03%
- YTD
- 0.36%
- 6M
- 2.80%
- 1Y
- 8.65%
- 3Y*
- 9.92%
- 5Y*
- 6.98%
- 10Y*
- 10.03%
VFMV
- 1D
- 0.35%
- 1M
- -4.26%
- YTD
- 2.90%
- 6M
- 3.50%
- 1Y
- 7.75%
- 3Y*
- 12.83%
- 5Y*
- 9.31%
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CZA vs. VFMV - Expense Ratio Comparison
CZA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMV's 0.13% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
CZA vs. VFMV — Risk / Return Rank
CZA
VFMV
CZA vs. VFMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV). 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 | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.49 | 0.63 | -0.15 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.81 | 0.94 | -0.13 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 1.13 | -0.02 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.65 | 0.80 | -0.15 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.74 | 3.69 | -0.95 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CZA | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 | 0.63 | -0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.44 | 0.80 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.46 | 0.66 | -0.19 |
Correlation
The correlation between CZA and VFMV is 0.84, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
CZA vs. VFMV - Dividend Comparison
CZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, less than VFMV's 2.04% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF | 1.55% | 1.56% | 1.27% | 1.36% | 1.71% | 0.89% | 1.42% | 1.40% | 1.27% | 1.10% | 1.87% | 1.37% |
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF | 2.04% | 2.12% | 1.46% | 2.20% | 2.08% | 1.31% | 2.14% | 2.43% | 2.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
CZA vs. VFMV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CZA drawdown since its inception was -53.20%, which is greater than VFMV's maximum drawdown of -33.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZA and VFMV.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| CZA | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.20% | -33.64% | -19.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.43% | -9.63% | -3.80% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.92% | -15.41% | -3.51% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.18% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.03% | -4.26% | -1.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.93% | -3.69% | -3.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.17% | 2.09% | +1.08% |
Volatility
CZA vs. VFMV - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) has a higher volatility of 5.16% compared to Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) at 3.43%. This indicates that CZA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VFMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| CZA | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.16% | 3.43% | +1.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.39% | 6.62% | +2.77% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.87% | 12.28% | +5.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.12% | 11.77% | +4.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.26% | 14.34% | +4.92% |