IWP vs. XMHQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWP (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWP is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Growth 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, IWP returned 12.40%/yr vs 12.83%/yr for XMHQ. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWP charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMHQ.

Performance

IWP vs. XMHQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) 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, IWP achieves a 3.75% return, which is significantly lower than XMHQ's 9.49% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IWP having a 12.40% annualized return and XMHQ not far ahead at 12.83%.

IWP

• 1D: -1.05%
• 1M: 4.11%
• YTD: 3.75%
• 6M: 2.84%
• 1Y: 5.63%
• 3Y*: 15.88%
• 5Y*: 6.59%
• 10Y*: 12.40%

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%

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

IWP vs. XMHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	3.75%	8.45%	21.86%	25.70%	-26.90%	12.60%	35.25%	35.04%	-4.89%	24.93%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	9.49%	4.71%	16.79%	29.51%	-12.42%	20.98%	26.61%	27.18%	-9.08%	15.64%

Correlation

The correlation between IWP and XMHQ is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2006	0.79

The correlation between IWP and XMHQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWP vs. XMHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWP	XMHQ
Industrials	24.2%	25.8%
Consumer Cyclical	21.1%	9.7%
Technology	20.0%	12.1%
Healthcare	13.5%	19.7%
Financial Services	6.9%	15.1%
Communication Services	4.2%	2.7%
Energy	3.8%	6.7%
Utilities	2.9%	2.2%
Consumer Defensive	1.5%	3.9%
Real Estate	1.4%	-
Basic Materials	0.4%	4.8%

Return for Risk

IWP vs. XMHQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWP

IWP Risk / Return Rank: 13
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 14

XMHQ

XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 28
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 24
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
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.

IWP vs. XMHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) 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.

	IWP	XMHQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.34	0.93	-0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.60	1.47	-0.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.17	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.38	1.63	-1.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.12	4.76	-3.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWP vs. XMHQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWP Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is lower than the XMHQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWP 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

	IWP	XMHQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34	0.93	-0.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	0.45	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.62	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.45	-0.02

Drawdowns

IWP vs. XMHQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWP drawdown since its inception was -56.92%, roughly equal to the maximum XMHQ drawdown of -58.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWP and XMHQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWP	XMHQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.92%	-58.19%	+1.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.79%	-8.85%	-5.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.20%	-24.56%	-0.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.62%	-25.47%	-13.15%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.62%	-36.90%	-1.72%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.10%	0.00%	-2.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.68%	-9.29%	-0.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.06%	3.02%	+2.04%

Volatility

IWP vs. XMHQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) is 3.73%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) has a volatility of 4.67%. This indicates that IWP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMHQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWP	XMHQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.73%	4.67%	-0.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.62%	11.09%	+1.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.50%	15.47%	+1.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.31%	20.74%	+1.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.67%	20.71%	+0.96%

IWP vs. XMHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWP has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than XMHQ's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IWP vs. XMHQ - Dividend Comparison

IWP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, less than XMHQ's 0.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.33%	0.37%	0.40%	0.54%	0.77%	0.30%	0.38%	0.59%	1.02%	0.78%	1.16%	0.98%
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

Can I hold both IWP and XMHQ in my portfolio?

IWP and XMHQ have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWP or XMHQ?

XMHQ has higher volatility (4.67%) compared to IWP (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWP dropped -56.92% vs XMHQ's -58.19%.

Which ETF is better, IWP or XMHQ?

On 10-year performance, XMHQ leads with 12.83% vs 12.40% for IWP. On fees, IWP is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, IWP 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, IWP or XMHQ?

Over the 10-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 12.83% return vs 12.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWP or XMHQ?

IWP is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMHQ.

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

XMHQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.55%, compared with 0.33% for IWP.

What is the main difference between IWP and XMHQ?

IWP is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while XMHQ is Mid Cap Blend Equities. IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index, while XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for IWP and 0.25% for XMHQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XMHQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.93 vs 0.34), 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.