GRPM vs. FDLS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GRPM (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF) and FDLS (Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - GRPM tracks the S&P MidCap 400® GARP Index while FDLS tracks the WI Fidelis Multi-Cap, Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GRPM returned 14.49%/yr vs 19.80%/yr for FDLS. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GRPM charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.76%/yr for FDLS.

Performance

GRPM vs. FDLS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) and Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF (FDLS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GRPM achieves a 6.14% return, which is significantly lower than FDLS's 16.11% return.

GRPM

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 6.14%
• 6M: 4.64%
• 1Y: 19.85%
• 3Y*: 14.49%
• 5Y*: 7.76%
• 10Y*: 11.23%

FDLS

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: 2.31%
• YTD: 16.11%
• 6M: 14.16%
• 1Y: 34.59%
• 3Y*: 19.80%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GRPM vs. FDLS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GRPM Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF	6.14%	7.81%	15.67%	18.79%	-2.89%
FDLS Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF	16.11%	22.47%	7.41%	20.70%	-1.68%

Correlation

The correlation between GRPM and FDLS is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 24, 2022	0.87

The correlation between GRPM and FDLS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

GRPM vs. FDLS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GRPM	FDLS
Financial Services	29.7%	13.9%
Technology	16.9%	23.9%
Energy	13.4%	6.7%
Healthcare	12.2%	11.2%
Consumer Cyclical	11.3%	3.7%
Industrials	10.8%	17.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.7%	4.8%
Basic Materials	-	2.4%
Communication Services	-	1.1%
Real Estate	-	2.1%
Utilities	-	1.7%

Return for Risk

GRPM vs. FDLS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GRPM

GRPM Risk / Return Rank: 42
GRPM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
GRPM Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
GRPM Omega Ratio Rank: 33
GRPM Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
GRPM Martin Ratio Rank: 48

FDLS

FDLS Risk / Return Rank: 71
FDLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
FDLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
FDLS Omega Ratio Rank: 63
FDLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
FDLS Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

GRPM vs. FDLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) and Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF (FDLS). 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.

	GRPM	FDLS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	2.04	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	2.87	-1.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.35	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.62	3.64	-1.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.66	14.37	-6.70

GRPM vs. FDLS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GRPM Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is lower than the FDLS Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GRPM and FDLS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GRPM vs. FDLS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GRPM drawdown since its inception was -43.12%, which is greater than FDLS's maximum drawdown of -23.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRPM and FDLS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GRPM	FDLS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.12%	-23.32%	-19.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.62%	-9.55%	+1.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.09%	-23.32%	-4.77%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.09%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.49%	-1.04%	-1.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.69%	-3.85%	-1.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.60%	2.41%	+0.19%

Volatility

GRPM vs. FDLS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) is 3.73%, while Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF (FDLS) has a volatility of 5.36%. This indicates that GRPM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FDLS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GRPM	FDLS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.73%	5.36%	-1.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.40%	12.85%	-2.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.15%	17.06%	-0.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.88%	19.07%	+1.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.22%	19.07%	+3.15%

GRPM vs. FDLS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GRPM has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than FDLS's 0.76% expense ratio.

Dividends

GRPM vs. FDLS - Dividend Comparison

GRPM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.75%, less than FDLS's 0.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FDLS Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF	0.85%	0.86%	7.26%	0.97%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GRPM Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF	0.75%	1.19%	0.95%	0.96%	1.28%	0.92%	1.16%	1.25%	1.50%	1.14%	1.00%	1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GRPM and FDLS in my portfolio?

GRPM and FDLS have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GRPM or FDLS?

FDLS has higher volatility (5.36%) compared to GRPM (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GRPM dropped -43.12% vs FDLS's -23.32%.

Which ETF is better, GRPM or FDLS?

On 3-year performance, FDLS leads with 19.80% vs 14.49% for GRPM. On fees, GRPM is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GRPM has been the lower-risk option at 3.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GRPM or FDLS?

Over the 3-year period, FDLS has performed better with a 19.80% return vs 14.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GRPM or FDLS?

GRPM is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for FDLS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GRPM or FDLS?

FDLS has the higher dividend yield at 0.85%, compared with 0.75% for GRPM.

What is the main difference between GRPM and FDLS?

GRPM tracks S&P MidCap 400® GARP Index, while FDLS tracks WI Fidelis Multi-Cap, Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for GRPM and 0.76% for FDLS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FDLS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.24), 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.