EFAA vs. IDMO

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

EFAA (Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF) and IDMO (Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EFAA is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Invesco, while IDMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P Momentum Developed ex U.S. & South Korea LargeMidCap Index. EFAA is actively managed, while IDMO is passively managed. Over the past year, EFAA returned 18.59% vs 21.68% for IDMO. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EFAA charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IDMO.

Performance

EFAA vs. IDMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) and Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF (IDMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFAA achieves a 7.78% return, which is significantly lower than IDMO's 8.27% return.

EFAA

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: 0.22%
• 6M: 5.72%
• YTD: 7.78%
• 1Y: 18.59%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IDMO

• 1D: -1.59%
• 1M: -2.15%
• 6M: 5.42%
• YTD: 8.27%
• 1Y: 21.68%
• 3Y*: 24.84%
• 5Y*: 15.50%
• 10Y*: 12.47%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EFAA vs. IDMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EFAA Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF	7.78%	25.80%	-3.61%
IDMO Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF	8.27%	42.17%	-4.20%

Correlation

The correlation between EFAA and IDMO is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 17, 2024	0.87

The correlation between EFAA and IDMO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

EFAA vs. IDMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EFAA	IDMO
Financial Services	24.3%	43.2%
Industrials	19.5%	21.3%
Technology	11.6%	6.2%
Healthcare	10.3%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	7.7%	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	6.6%	2.5%
Basic Materials	6.1%	10.6%
Communication Services	4.9%	2.1%
Energy	3.7%	1.7%
Utilities	3.6%	7.9%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

EFAA vs. IDMO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

EFAA

EFAA Risk / Return Rank: 52
EFAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
EFAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
EFAA Omega Ratio Rank: 54
EFAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
EFAA Martin Ratio Rank: 53

IDMO

IDMO Risk / Return Rank: 42
IDMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
IDMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
IDMO Omega Ratio Rank: 39
IDMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
IDMO Martin Ratio Rank: 51

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

EFAA vs. IDMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) and Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF (IDMO). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	EFAA	IDMO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.50	1.18	+0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	1.74	+0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.22	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.84	1.77	+0.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.11	6.94	+0.17

EFAA vs. IDMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFAA Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the IDMO Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFAA and IDMO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EFAA vs. IDMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFAA drawdown since its inception was -11.97%, smaller than the maximum IDMO drawdown of -39.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFAA and IDMO.

Drawdown Indicators

	EFAA	IDMO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.97%	-39.38%	+27.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.14%	-12.31%	+2.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.65%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.07%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-31.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.96%	-3.93%	+2.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.98%	-9.70%	+7.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.62%	3.13%	-0.51%

Volatility

EFAA vs. IDMO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) is 3.19%, while Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF (IDMO) has a volatility of 5.93%. This indicates that EFAA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IDMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EFAA	IDMO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.19%	5.93%	-2.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.64%	16.86%	-6.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.44%	18.53%	-6.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.02%	18.14%	-5.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.02%	17.89%	-4.87%

EFAA vs. IDMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFAA has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than IDMO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

EFAA vs. IDMO - Dividend Comparison

EFAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.11%, more than IDMO's 3.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EFAA Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF	8.11%	7.94%	3.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IDMO Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF	3.69%	3.71%	2.24%	2.89%	3.66%	1.81%	1.63%	2.78%	3.27%	3.08%	2.18%	2.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EFAA and IDMO in my portfolio?

EFAA and IDMO have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EFAA or IDMO?

IDMO has higher volatility (5.93%) compared to EFAA (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFAA dropped -11.97% vs IDMO's -39.38%.

Which ETF is better, EFAA or IDMO?

On 1-year performance, IDMO leads with 21.68% vs 18.59% for EFAA. On fees, IDMO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EFAA has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EFAA or IDMO?

Over the 1-year period, IDMO has performed better with a 21.68% return vs 18.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EFAA or IDMO?

IDMO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EFAA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EFAA or IDMO?

EFAA has the higher dividend yield at 8.11%, compared with 3.69% for IDMO.

What is the main difference between EFAA and IDMO?

EFAA is categorized as Derivative Income, while IDMO is Momentum. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EFAA and 0.25% for IDMO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFAA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.50 vs 1.18), 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.