GLRY vs. XMHQ
GLRY (Inspire Faithward Mid Cap Momentum ESG ETF) and XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLRY is a Momentum fund actively managed by Inspire, while XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index. GLRY is actively managed, while XMHQ is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GLRY returned 8.81%/yr vs 9.37%/yr for XMHQ. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GLRY charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMHQ.
Performance
GLRY vs. XMHQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLRY achieves a 17.07% return, which is significantly higher than XMHQ's 9.49% return.
GLRY
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- 2.25%
- YTD
- 17.07%
- 6M
- 15.71%
- 1Y
- 29.59%
- 3Y*
- 20.95%
- 5Y*
- 8.81%
- 10Y*
- —
XMHQ
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- 4.20%
- YTD
- 9.49%
- 6M
- 9.51%
- 1Y
- 14.33%
- 3Y*
- 16.56%
- 5Y*
- 9.37%
- 10Y*
- 12.83%
GLRY vs. XMHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLRY Inspire Faithward Mid Cap Momentum ESG ETF | 17.07% | 16.50% | 16.59% | 19.58% | -22.50% | 15.97% | 4.13% |
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 9.49% | 4.71% | 16.79% | 29.51% | -12.42% | 20.98% | 2.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLRY and XMHQ 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2020 | 0.86 |
The correlation between GLRY and XMHQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.88 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GLRY vs. XMHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GLRY
XMHQ
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Energy
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Technology
GLRY
XMHQ
Industrials
GLRY
XMHQ
Consumer Cyclical
GLRY
XMHQ
Financial Services
GLRY
XMHQ
Healthcare
GLRY
XMHQ
Utilities
GLRY
XMHQ
Real Estate
GLRY
XMHQ
-
Energy
GLRY
XMHQ
Basic Materials
GLRY
XMHQ
Communication Services
GLRY
XMHQ
Consumer Defensive
GLRY
XMHQ
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
GLRY vs. XMHQ — Risk / Return Rank
GLRY
XMHQ
GLRY vs. XMHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Inspire Faithward Mid Cap Momentum ESG ETF (GLRY) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ). 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.
| GLRY | XMHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.70 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.77 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.17 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.73 | 1.63 | +1.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.48 | 4.76 | +4.72 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLRY | XMHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.64 | 0.93 | +0.70 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.44 | 0.45 | -0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.62 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.52 | 0.45 | +0.07 |
Drawdowns
GLRY vs. XMHQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLRY drawdown since its inception was -40.60%, smaller than the maximum XMHQ drawdown of -58.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLRY and XMHQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLRY | XMHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.60% | -58.19% | +17.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.89% | -8.85% | -2.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.50% | -24.56% | +4.06% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -34.63% | -25.47% | -9.16% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.04% | -9.29% | -6.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.13% | 3.02% | +0.11% |
Volatility
GLRY vs. XMHQ - Volatility Comparison
Inspire Faithward Mid Cap Momentum ESG ETF (GLRY) has a higher volatility of 5.62% compared to Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) at 4.67%. This indicates that GLRY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMHQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLRY | XMHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.62% | 4.67% | +0.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.14% | 11.09% | +4.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.19% | 15.47% | +2.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.06% | 20.74% | -0.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.41% | 20.71% | +0.70% |
GLRY vs. XMHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLRY has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than XMHQ's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLRY vs. XMHQ - Dividend Comparison
GLRY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.24%, less than XMHQ's 0.55% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLRY Inspire Faithward Mid Cap Momentum ESG ETF | 0.24% | 0.34% | 0.52% | 1.07% | 1.04% | 4.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 0.55% | 0.64% | 5.20% | 0.73% | 1.72% | 1.00% | 1.12% | 1.22% | 1.59% | 1.06% | 1.63% | 1.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GLRY and XMHQ 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.
GLRY has higher volatility (5.62%) compared to XMHQ (4.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLRY dropped -40.60% vs XMHQ's -58.19%.
On 5-year performance, XMHQ leads with 9.37% vs 8.81% for GLRY. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XMHQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 9.37% return vs 8.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XMHQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GLRY.
XMHQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.55%, compared with 0.24% for GLRY.
GLRY is categorized as Momentum, while XMHQ is Mid Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Inspire and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for GLRY and 0.25% for XMHQ.
GLRY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.64 vs 0.93), 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 GLRY and XMHQ
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