GRPM vs. IJH
GRPM (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF) and IJH (iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - GRPM tracks the S&P MidCap 400® GARP Index while IJH tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GRPM returned 11.33%/yr vs 10.97%/yr for IJH. Their correlation of 0.94 means they have usually moved in the same direction. GRPM charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for IJH.
Performance
GRPM vs. IJH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GRPM achieves a 13.17% return, which is significantly lower than IJH's 15.88% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GRPM having a 11.33% annualized return and IJH not far behind at 10.97%.
GRPM
- 1D
- -0.35%
- 1M
- 2.06%
- 6M
- 11.71%
- YTD
- 13.17%
- 1Y
- 21.04%
- 3Y*
- 13.73%
- 5Y*
- 9.29%
- 10Y*
- 11.33%
- ALL TIME*
- 11.48%
IJH
- 1D
- 1.12%
- 1M
- 0.03%
- 6M
- 10.44%
- YTD
- 15.88%
- 1Y
- 24.18%
- 3Y*
- 13.99%
- 5Y*
- 8.86%
- 10Y*
- 10.97%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.89%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.43M | $1.18M | $1.33M | |
| $455.75M | $451.31M | $537.83M |
GRPM vs. IJH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GRPM Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF | 13.17% | 7.81% | 15.67% | 18.79% | -11.63% | 26.35% | 15.60% | 23.05% | -12.45% | 13.05% |
IJH iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF | 15.88% | 7.42% | 13.92% | 16.40% | -13.11% | 24.72% | 13.60% | 26.10% | -11.19% | 16.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between GRPM and IJH is 0.82, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.95 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 8, 2010 | 0.94 |
The correlation between GRPM and IJH shifts across timeframes, from 0.82 (1 year) to 0.95 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GRPM vs. IJH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GRPM
IJH
Financial Services
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
GRPM
IJH
Technology
GRPM
IJH
Healthcare
GRPM
IJH
Consumer Cyclical
GRPM
IJH
Industrials
GRPM
IJH
Energy
GRPM
IJH
Basic Materials
GRPM
IJH
Consumer Defensive
GRPM
IJH
Communication Services
GRPM
-
IJH
Real Estate
GRPM
-
IJH
Utilities
GRPM
-
IJH
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
GRPM vs. IJH — Risk / Return Rank
GRPM
IJH
GRPM vs. IJH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) and iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF (IJH). 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 | IJH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.28 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.58 | 2.75 | -0.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.67 | 10.01 | -2.34 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GRPM vs. IJH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GRPM drawdown since its inception was -43.12%, smaller than the maximum IJH drawdown of -55.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRPM and IJH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GRPM | IJH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.12% | -55.07% | +11.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.62% | -8.83% | +1.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.09% | -24.10% | -3.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.09% | -24.10% | -3.99% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -43.12% | -42.18% | -0.94% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.19% | -1.30% | +0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.66% | -7.53% | +1.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.56% | 2.42% | +0.14% |
Volatility
GRPM vs. IJH - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) has a higher volatility of 4.04% compared to iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF (IJH) at 3.63%. This indicates that GRPM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GRPM | IJH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.04% | 3.63% | +0.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.51% | 11.63% | -1.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.65% | 15.70% | -0.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.80% | 19.68% | +1.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.19% | 21.14% | +1.05% |
GRPM vs. IJH - Expense Ratio Comparison
GRPM has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than IJH's 0.05% expense ratio.
Dividends
GRPM vs. IJH - Dividend Comparison
GRPM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.70%, less than IJH's 1.17% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GRPM Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF | 0.70% | 1.19% | 0.95% | 0.96% | 1.28% | 0.92% | 1.16% | 1.25% | 1.50% | 1.14% | 1.00% | 1.43% |
IJH iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF | 1.17% | 1.36% | 1.33% | 1.46% | 1.68% | 1.18% | 1.28% | 1.63% | 1.72% | 1.19% | 1.60% | 1.56% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GRPM and IJH have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GRPM has higher volatility (4.04%) compared to IJH (3.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GRPM dropped -43.12% vs IJH's -55.07%.
On 10-year performance, GRPM leads with 11.33% vs 10.97% for IJH. On fees, IJH is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, IJH has been the lower-risk option at 3.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GRPM has performed better with a 11.33% return vs 10.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IJH is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for GRPM.
IJH has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 0.70% for GRPM.
GRPM tracks S&P MidCap 400® GARP Index, while IJH tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for GRPM and 0.05% for IJH.
IJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs 1.26), 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 GRPM and IJH
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