INCO vs. XMHQ

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

INCO (Columbia India Consumer ETF) and XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - INCO is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the Indxx India Consumer Index, while XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, INCO returned 8.31%/yr vs 12.56%/yr for XMHQ. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INCO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMHQ.

Performance

INCO vs. XMHQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia India Consumer ETF (INCO) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INCO achieves a -12.41% return, which is significantly lower than XMHQ's 7.58% return. Over the past 10 years, INCO has underperformed XMHQ with an annualized return of 8.31%, while XMHQ has yielded a comparatively higher 12.56% annualized return.

INCO

• 1D: -0.65%
• 1M: -6.27%
• YTD: -12.41%
• 6M: -10.02%
• 1Y: -12.31%
• 3Y*: 6.45%
• 5Y*: 5.53%
• 10Y*: 8.31%

XMHQ

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 7.58%
• 6M: 8.05%
• 1Y: 12.57%
• 3Y*: 15.37%
• 5Y*: 9.12%
• 10Y*: 12.56%

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

INCO vs. XMHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
INCO Columbia India Consumer ETF	-12.41%	0.59%	12.70%	34.63%	-7.01%	19.28%	14.55%	-4.22%	-10.81%	53.28%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	7.58%	4.71%	16.79%	29.51%	-12.42%	20.98%	26.61%	27.18%	-9.08%	15.64%

Correlation

The correlation between INCO and XMHQ is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.30
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 11, 2011	0.36

The correlation between INCO and XMHQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (1 year) to 0.38 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

INCO vs. XMHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	INCO	XMHQ
Consumer Cyclical	59.3%	9.7%
Consumer Defensive	37.5%	3.9%
Technology	1.9%	12.1%
Industrials	1.4%	25.8%
Basic Materials	-	4.8%
Communication Services	-	2.7%
Energy	-	6.7%
Financial Services	-	15.1%
Healthcare	-	19.7%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	2.2%

Return for Risk

INCO vs. XMHQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

INCO

INCO Risk / Return Rank: 3
INCO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
INCO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
INCO Omega Ratio Rank: 4
INCO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
INCO Martin Ratio Rank: 1

XMHQ

XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 27
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 23
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

INCO vs. XMHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia India Consumer ETF (INCO) 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.

	INCO	XMHQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.73	0.81	-1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.99	1.29	-2.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.89	1.15	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.58	1.43	-2.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.46	4.17	-5.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

INCO vs. XMHQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INCO Sharpe Ratio is -0.73, which is lower than the XMHQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INCO and XMHQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	INCO	XMHQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.73	0.81	-1.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33	0.44	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.41	0.61	-0.20
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.42	0.45	-0.03

Drawdowns

INCO vs. XMHQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INCO drawdown since its inception was -47.69%, smaller than the maximum XMHQ drawdown of -58.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INCO and XMHQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	INCO	XMHQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.69%	-58.19%	+10.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.37%	-8.85%	-12.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.98%	-24.56%	-5.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.98%	-25.47%	-4.51%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-47.69%	-36.90%	-10.79%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.40%	-2.44%	-22.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.58%	-9.28%	-1.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.47%	3.02%	+5.45%

Volatility

INCO vs. XMHQ - Volatility Comparison

Columbia India Consumer ETF (INCO) has a higher volatility of 5.50% compared to Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) at 4.06%. This indicates that INCO'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.

Volatility by Period

	INCO	XMHQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.50%	4.06%	+1.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.33%	11.28%	+3.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.90%	15.61%	+1.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.91%	20.76%	-3.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.32%	20.72%	-0.40%

INCO vs. XMHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

INCO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than XMHQ's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

INCO vs. XMHQ - Dividend Comparison

INCO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
INCO Columbia India Consumer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	2.88%	3.81%	10.57%	6.25%	0.34%	0.28%	0.12%	0.05%	0.09%	0.00%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	0.56%	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

Can I hold both INCO and XMHQ in my portfolio?

INCO and XMHQ have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, INCO or XMHQ?

INCO has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to XMHQ (4.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INCO dropped -47.69% vs XMHQ's -58.19%.

Which ETF is better, INCO or XMHQ?

On 10-year performance, XMHQ leads with 12.56% vs 8.31% for INCO. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XMHQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INCO or XMHQ?

Over the 10-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 12.56% return vs 8.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INCO or XMHQ?

XMHQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for INCO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, INCO or XMHQ?

XMHQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.56%, compared with 0.00% for INCO.

What is the main difference between INCO and XMHQ?

INCO is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XMHQ is Mid Cap Blend Equities. INCO tracks Indxx India Consumer Index, while XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for INCO and 0.25% for XMHQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XMHQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.81 vs -0.73), 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.