PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EQWL vs. MTUM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EQWL vs. MTUM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EQWL achieves a 8.85% return, which is significantly lower than MTUM's 32.00% return. Over the past 10 years, EQWL has underperformed MTUM with an annualized return of 14.81%, while MTUM has yielded a comparatively higher 17.49% annualized return.


EQWL

1D
-0.64%
1M
1.01%
YTD
8.85%
6M
8.38%
1Y
20.95%
3Y*
19.23%
5Y*
11.94%
10Y*
14.81%

MTUM

1D
-4.48%
1M
8.74%
YTD
32.00%
6M
29.92%
1Y
41.78%
3Y*
33.87%
5Y*
15.18%
10Y*
17.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EQWL vs. MTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EQWL
Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF
8.85%17.61%19.11%19.48%-11.46%28.29%13.94%29.54%-6.30%24.41%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
32.00%22.15%32.89%9.15%-18.27%13.36%29.86%27.25%-1.67%37.50%

Correlation

The correlation between EQWL and MTUM is 0.64, 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

0.64

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.68

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2013

0.71

The correlation between EQWL and MTUM shifts across timeframes, from 0.64 (1 year) to 0.75 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EQWL vs. MTUM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EQWL
MTUM

Technology

26.7%
50.2%

Financial Services

14.9%
5.0%

Healthcare

13.5%
3.5%

Industrials

13.2%
15.0%

Consumer Defensive

8.3%
3.7%

Consumer Cyclical

8.2%
2.9%

Communication Services

7.1%
5.1%

Energy

2.7%
10.5%

Utilities

2.6%
0.6%

Real Estate

1.9%
1.3%

Basic Materials

1.0%
2.3%

Technology

EQWL
26.7%
MTUM
50.2%

Financial Services

EQWL
14.9%
MTUM
5.0%

Healthcare

EQWL
13.5%
MTUM
3.5%

Industrials

EQWL
13.2%
MTUM
15.0%

Consumer Defensive

EQWL
8.3%
MTUM
3.7%

Consumer Cyclical

EQWL
8.2%
MTUM
2.9%

Communication Services

EQWL
7.1%
MTUM
5.1%

Energy

EQWL
2.7%
MTUM
10.5%

Utilities

EQWL
2.6%
MTUM
0.6%

Real Estate

EQWL
1.9%
MTUM
1.3%

Basic Materials

EQWL
1.0%
MTUM
2.3%

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

EQWL vs. MTUM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EQWL
EQWL Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
EQWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQWL Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
EQWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQWL Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

MTUM
MTUM Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
MTUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MTUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
MTUM Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
MTUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
MTUM Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EQWL vs. MTUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). 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.


EQWLMTUMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.35

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.71

3.64

-0.93

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.33

13.91

-2.59

EQWL vs. MTUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQWL Sharpe Ratio is 1.97, which is comparable to the MTUM Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQWL and MTUM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

EQWL vs. MTUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQWL drawdown since its inception was -49.36%, which is greater than MTUM's maximum drawdown of -34.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQWL and MTUM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EQWLMTUMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.36%

-34.08%

-15.28%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.76%

-11.54%

+3.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.95%

-20.99%

+6.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.99%

-32.28%

+9.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.30%

-34.08%

-0.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.52%

-4.48%

+2.96%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.68%

-6.19%

-0.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.85%

3.01%

-1.16%

Volatility

EQWL vs. MTUM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL) is 3.88%, while iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) has a volatility of 12.20%. This indicates that EQWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EQWLMTUMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.88%

12.20%

-8.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.27%

19.44%

-11.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.71%

21.93%

-11.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.04%

21.15%

-6.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.78%

21.31%

-4.53%

EQWL vs. MTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQWL has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than MTUM's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

EQWL vs. MTUM - Dividend Comparison

EQWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, more than MTUM's 0.56% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EQWL
Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF
1.60%1.67%1.86%1.97%2.12%1.65%2.01%2.04%2.23%1.27%2.01%2.03%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
0.56%0.91%0.75%1.35%1.80%0.55%0.83%1.48%1.27%1.02%1.43%1.12%

Frequently Asked Questions


EQWL and MTUM have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MTUM has higher volatility (12.20%) compared to EQWL (3.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EQWL dropped -49.36% vs MTUM's -34.08%.

On 10-year performance, MTUM leads with 17.49% vs 14.81% for EQWL. On fees, MTUM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, EQWL has been the lower-risk option at 3.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, MTUM has performed better with a 17.49% return vs 14.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MTUM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for EQWL.

EQWL has the higher dividend yield at 1.60%, compared with 0.56% for MTUM.

EQWL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while MTUM is Momentum. EQWL tracks S&P 100 Equal Weight Index, while MTUM tracks MSCI USA Momentum SR Variant Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EQWL and 0.15% for MTUM.

EQWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs 1.92), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EQWL and MTUM

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