EPMB vs. PWC
EPMB (Harbor Mid Cap Core ETF) and PWC (Invesco Dynamic Market ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. EPMB is actively managed, while PWC is passively managed. Over the past year, EPMB returned 27.09% vs 8.55% for PWC. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EPMB charges 0.88%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for PWC.
Performance
EPMB vs. PWC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EPMB achieves a 14.90% return, which is significantly higher than PWC's 5.50% return.
EPMB
- 1D
- -1.26%
- 1M
- 2.30%
- YTD
- 14.90%
- 6M
- 13.66%
- 1Y
- 27.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PWC
- 1D
- 0.70%
- 1M
- -1.43%
- YTD
- 5.50%
- 6M
- 4.60%
- 1Y
- 8.55%
- 3Y*
- 13.17%
- 5Y*
- 6.41%
- 10Y*
- 9.67%
EPMB vs. PWC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EPMB Harbor Mid Cap Core ETF | 14.90% | 15.95% |
PWC Invesco Dynamic Market ETF | 5.50% | 6.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between EPMB and PWC is 0.73, 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 | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2025 | 0.73 |
The correlation between EPMB and PWC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.
EPMB vs. PWC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EPMB
PWC
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Energy
Communication Services
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
EPMB
PWC
Technology
EPMB
PWC
Financial Services
EPMB
PWC
Healthcare
EPMB
PWC
Consumer Cyclical
EPMB
PWC
Real Estate
EPMB
PWC
Basic Materials
EPMB
PWC
Energy
EPMB
PWC
Communication Services
EPMB
PWC
Utilities
EPMB
PWC
Consumer Defensive
EPMB
PWC
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
EPMB vs. PWC — Risk / Return Rank
EPMB
PWC
EPMB vs. PWC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Mid Cap Core ETF (EPMB) and Invesco Dynamic Market ETF (PWC). 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.
| EPMB | PWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.99 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.15 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.04 | 1.33 | +1.71 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.56 | 3.99 | +7.58 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EPMB vs. PWC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EPMB drawdown since its inception was -8.95%, smaller than the maximum PWC drawdown of -78.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EPMB and PWC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EPMB | PWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.95% | -78.13% | +69.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.95% | -6.45% | -2.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.58% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -39.45% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.26% | -2.69% | +1.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.46% | -36.13% | +34.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.35% | 2.15% | +0.20% |
Volatility
EPMB vs. PWC - Volatility Comparison
Harbor Mid Cap Core ETF (EPMB) has a higher volatility of 4.44% compared to Invesco Dynamic Market ETF (PWC) at 2.87%. This indicates that EPMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PWC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EPMB | PWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.44% | 2.87% | +1.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.96% | 7.29% | +3.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.60% | 9.86% | +4.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.81% | 16.03% | -1.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.81% | 18.79% | -3.98% |
EPMB vs. PWC - Expense Ratio Comparison
EPMB has a 0.88% expense ratio, which is higher than PWC's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
EPMB vs. PWC - Dividend Comparison
EPMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.56%, less than PWC's 1.80% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EPMB Harbor Mid Cap Core ETF | 1.56% | 1.79% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PWC Invesco Dynamic Market ETF | 1.80% | 1.77% | 1.58% | 1.67% | 1.51% | 0.56% | 1.09% | 0.95% | 1.44% | 1.75% | 1.35% | 1.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EPMB and PWC have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EPMB has higher volatility (4.44%) compared to PWC (2.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EPMB dropped -8.95% vs PWC's -78.13%.
On 1-year performance, EPMB leads with 27.09% vs 8.55% for PWC. On fees, PWC is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, PWC has been the lower-risk option at 2.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EPMB has performed better with a 27.09% return vs 8.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PWC is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for EPMB.
PWC has the higher dividend yield at 1.80%, compared with 1.56% for EPMB.
They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.88% for EPMB and 0.60% for PWC.
EPMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 0.88), 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 EPMB and PWC
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