EWL vs. XMMO
EWL (iShares MSCI Switzerland ETF) and XMMO (Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EWL is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Switzerland Index, while XMMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EWL returned 10.14%/yr vs 19.95%/yr for XMMO. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWL charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XMMO.
Performance
EWL vs. XMMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EWL achieves a 4.60% return, which is significantly lower than XMMO's 22.77% return. Over the past 10 years, EWL has underperformed XMMO with an annualized return of 10.14%, while XMMO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.95% annualized return.
EWL
- 1D
- -0.30%
- 1M
- 1.55%
- YTD
- 4.60%
- 6M
- 7.45%
- 1Y
- 13.57%
- 3Y*
- 12.47%
- 5Y*
- 6.50%
- 10Y*
- 10.14%
XMMO
- 1D
- 0.96%
- 1M
- 0.99%
- YTD
- 22.77%
- 6M
- 22.33%
- 1Y
- 36.63%
- 3Y*
- 30.62%
- 5Y*
- 15.91%
- 10Y*
- 19.95%
EWL vs. XMMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EWL iShares MSCI Switzerland ETF | 4.60% | 32.92% | -2.80% | 17.67% | -18.89% | 20.20% | 11.80% | 31.58% | -9.21% | 23.34% |
XMMO Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF | 22.77% | 13.04% | 38.03% | 20.39% | -16.02% | 16.69% | 29.17% | 36.78% | 6.12% | 37.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between EWL and XMMO is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2005 | 0.59 |
The correlation between EWL and XMMO shifts across timeframes, from 0.44 (3 years) to 0.59 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
EWL vs. XMMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EWL
XMMO
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
Utilities
Energy
-
Healthcare
EWL
XMMO
Financial Services
EWL
XMMO
Consumer Defensive
EWL
XMMO
Industrials
EWL
XMMO
Basic Materials
EWL
XMMO
Consumer Cyclical
EWL
XMMO
Communication Services
EWL
XMMO
Real Estate
EWL
XMMO
Technology
EWL
XMMO
Utilities
EWL
XMMO
Energy
EWL
-
XMMO
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
EWL vs. XMMO — Risk / Return Rank
EWL
XMMO
EWL vs. XMMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Switzerland ETF (EWL) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). 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.
| EWL | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.33 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.01 | 4.41 | -3.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.24 | 17.54 | -14.30 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EWL vs. XMMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EWL drawdown since its inception was -51.62%, smaller than the maximum XMMO drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWL and XMMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EWL | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.62% | -55.37% | +3.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.48% | -8.34% | -5.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.48% | -24.93% | +11.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.99% | -27.91% | -1.08% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.99% | -36.74% | +7.75% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.63% | -1.19% | -2.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.08% | -9.44% | -1.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.22% | 2.09% | +2.13% |
Volatility
EWL vs. XMMO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Switzerland ETF (EWL) is 5.12%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) has a volatility of 9.07%. This indicates that EWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EWL | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.12% | 9.07% | -3.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.70% | 16.76% | -4.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.09% | 19.74% | -3.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.13% | 21.62% | -5.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.47% | 22.35% | -5.88% |
EWL vs. XMMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
EWL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than XMMO's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
EWL vs. XMMO - Dividend Comparison
EWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.63%, more than XMMO's 0.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EWL iShares MSCI Switzerland ETF | 1.63% | 1.71% | 2.21% | 2.12% | 2.04% | 1.73% | 1.45% | 1.85% | 2.56% | 2.05% | 2.75% | 2.58% |
XMMO Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF | 0.61% | 0.78% | 0.34% | 0.80% | 1.43% | 0.41% | 0.61% | 0.60% | 0.19% | 0.21% | 0.22% | 0.64% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EWL and XMMO have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XMMO has higher volatility (9.07%) compared to EWL (5.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWL dropped -51.62% vs XMMO's -55.37%.
On 10-year performance, XMMO leads with 19.95% vs 10.14% for EWL. On fees, XMMO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, EWL has been the lower-risk option at 5.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XMMO has performed better with a 19.95% return vs 10.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XMMO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EWL.
EWL has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 0.61% for XMMO.
EWL is categorized as Europe Equities, while XMMO is Momentum. EWL tracks MSCI Switzerland Index, while XMMO tracks S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWL and 0.35% for XMMO.
XMMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 0.85), 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 EWL and XMMO
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