PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FDM vs. OMFL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FDM vs. OMFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Dow Jones Select MicroCap Index Fund (FDM) and Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDM achieves a 7.48% return, which is significantly lower than OMFL's 12.39% return.


FDM

1D
-2.13%
1M
-2.89%
YTD
7.48%
6M
7.77%
1Y
27.59%
3Y*
18.03%
5Y*
8.37%
10Y*
11.42%

OMFL

1D
-0.10%
1M
4.53%
YTD
12.39%
6M
12.90%
1Y
21.98%
3Y*
14.35%
5Y*
9.27%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FDM vs. OMFL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FDM
First Trust Dow Jones Select MicroCap Index Fund
7.48%18.64%13.00%12.76%-11.61%35.08%-4.04%27.45%-13.53%3.81%
OMFL
Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
12.39%13.68%6.82%21.53%-13.97%28.95%20.91%35.58%-2.55%4.95%

Correlation

The correlation between FDM and OMFL is 0.62, 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

0.62

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

0.70

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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2017

0.75

The correlation between FDM and OMFL shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (1 year) to 0.76 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FDM vs. OMFL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FDM
OMFL

Financial Services

41.2%
11.5%

Industrials

16.4%
9.8%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
9.5%

Technology

6.2%
31.0%

Healthcare

6.2%
10.4%

Energy

5.0%
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%
8.8%

Basic Materials

4.2%
2.5%

Communication Services

3.7%
11.7%

Real Estate

1.4%
0.8%

Utilities

1.0%
0.4%

Financial Services

FDM
41.2%
OMFL
11.5%

Industrials

FDM
16.4%
OMFL
9.8%

Consumer Cyclical

FDM
10.0%
OMFL
9.5%

Technology

FDM
6.2%
OMFL
31.0%

Healthcare

FDM
6.2%
OMFL
10.4%

Energy

FDM
5.0%
OMFL
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

FDM
4.7%
OMFL
8.8%

Basic Materials

FDM
4.2%
OMFL
2.5%

Communication Services

FDM
3.7%
OMFL
11.7%

Real Estate

FDM
1.4%
OMFL
0.8%

Utilities

FDM
1.0%
OMFL
0.4%

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

FDM vs. OMFL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDM
FDM Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
FDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDM Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
FDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDM Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

OMFL
OMFL Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
OMFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMFL Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
OMFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMFL Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
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.

FDM vs. OMFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Dow Jones Select MicroCap Index Fund (FDM) and Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL). 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.


FDMOMFLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.33

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.98

2.91

+0.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.04

13.12

-4.07

FDM vs. OMFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDM Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is comparable to the OMFL Sharpe Ratio of 1.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDM and OMFL, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FDMOMFLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.47

1.84

-0.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.39

0.56

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.34

0.70

-0.36

Drawdowns

FDM vs. OMFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDM drawdown since its inception was -63.45%, which is greater than OMFL's maximum drawdown of -33.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDM and OMFL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FDMOMFLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-63.45%

-33.24%

-30.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.30%

-7.58%

-1.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.47%

-15.52%

-7.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.74%

-22.44%

-1.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.31%

-0.19%

-4.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.35%

-4.80%

-6.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.06%

1.68%

+1.38%

Volatility

FDM vs. OMFL - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Dow Jones Select MicroCap Index Fund (FDM) has a higher volatility of 4.50% compared to Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL) at 2.40%. This indicates that FDM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OMFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FDMOMFLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.50%

2.40%

+2.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.22%

9.45%

+3.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.90%

12.03%

+6.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.39%

16.75%

+4.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.36%

20.11%

+3.25%

FDM vs. OMFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDM has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than OMFL's 0.29% expense ratio.


Dividends

FDM vs. OMFL - Dividend Comparison

FDM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, more than OMFL's 0.75% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FDM
First Trust Dow Jones Select MicroCap Index Fund
1.28%1.43%1.56%1.81%1.80%1.08%1.68%1.37%1.26%0.97%1.13%1.45%
OMFL
Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
0.75%0.80%1.22%1.37%1.55%0.95%1.48%1.53%1.39%0.32%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FDM and OMFL have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FDM has higher volatility (4.50%) compared to OMFL (2.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDM dropped -63.45% vs OMFL's -33.24%.

On 5-year performance, OMFL leads with 9.27% vs 8.37% for FDM. On fees, OMFL is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, OMFL has been the lower-risk option at 2.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, OMFL has performed better with a 9.27% return vs 8.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

OMFL is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FDM.

FDM has the higher dividend yield at 1.28%, compared with 0.75% for OMFL.

FDM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while OMFL is Large Cap Blend Equities. FDM tracks Dow Jones Select Microcap Index, while OMFL tracks Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FDM and 0.29% for OMFL.

OMFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.47), 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 FDM and OMFL

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