PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWR vs. XMMO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWR vs. XMMO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) and XMMO (Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWR is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Index, while XMMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWR returned 11.55%/yr vs 19.73%/yr for XMMO. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWR charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XMMO.

Performance

IWR vs. XMMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWR achieves a 12.43% return, which is significantly lower than XMMO's 23.73% return. Over the past 10 years, IWR has underperformed XMMO with an annualized return of 11.55%, while XMMO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.73% annualized return.

IWR

1D
-0.26%
1M
3.79%
YTD
12.43%
6M
12.21%
1Y
21.66%
3Y*
17.25%
5Y*
8.00%
10Y*
11.55%

XMMO

1D
0.62%
1M
6.87%
YTD
23.73%
6M
25.73%
1Y
36.97%
3Y*
32.10%
5Y*
16.69%
10Y*
19.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWR vs. XMMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		12.43%10.37%15.21%17.05%-17.48%22.44%16.93%30.23%-9.10%18.25%
XMMO
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF		23.73%13.04%38.03%20.39%-16.02%16.69%29.17%36.78%6.12%37.18%

Correlation

The correlation between IWR and XMMO is 0.81, 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

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.87

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2005

0.89

The correlation between IWR and XMMO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWR vs. XMMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWR
XMMO

Industrials

18.4%
41.1%

Technology

17.2%
16.7%

Financial Services

12.5%
2.4%

Consumer Cyclical

11.2%
4.6%

Healthcare

8.7%
6.3%

Energy

7.2%
7.7%

Real Estate

7.0%
6.1%

Utilities

6.1%
5.8%

Basic Materials

4.3%
7.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
0.5%

Communication Services

3.4%
1.6%

Industrials

IWR
18.4%
XMMO
41.1%

Technology

IWR
17.2%
XMMO
16.7%

Financial Services

IWR
12.5%
XMMO
2.4%

Consumer Cyclical

IWR
11.2%
XMMO
4.6%

Healthcare

IWR
8.7%
XMMO
6.3%

Energy

IWR
7.2%
XMMO
7.7%

Real Estate

IWR
7.0%
XMMO
6.1%

Utilities

IWR
6.1%
XMMO
5.8%

Basic Materials

IWR
4.3%
XMMO
7.2%

Consumer Defensive

IWR
4.1%
XMMO
0.5%

Communication Services

IWR
3.4%
XMMO
1.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Russell Midcap ETF

Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF

Often compared with IWR:
IWR vs. VOIWR vs. IWDIWR vs. SPMDIWR vs. IWNIWR vs. SCHMIWR vs. VXFIWR vs. REGL
Often compared with XMMO:
XMMO vs. SPMOXMMO vs. XMHQXMMO vs. VOOXMMO vs. MTUMXMMO vs. QMOMXMMO vs. SPGPXMMO vs. RFV

Return for Risk

IWR vs. XMMO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWR
IWR Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
IWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWR Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
IWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWR Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
XMMO
XMMO Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
XMMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMMO Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
XMMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMMO Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IWR vs. XMMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). 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.

IWRXMMODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.63
1.99

-0.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.35
2.77

-0.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.35

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.66

4.45

-1.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.28

18.21

-7.93

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWR vs. XMMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWR Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the XMMO Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWR and XMMO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

IWRXMMODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.63

1.99

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

0.78

-0.34

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

0.89

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.58

-0.08

Drawdowns

IWR vs. XMMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWR drawdown since its inception was -58.78%, which is greater than XMMO's maximum drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWR and XMMO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWRXMMODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.78%

-55.37%

-3.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.17%

-8.34%

+0.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.09%

-24.93%

+3.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.18%

-27.91%

+1.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.59%

-36.74%

-3.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

0.00%

-0.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.80%

-9.45%

+1.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.11%

2.04%

+0.07%

Volatility

IWR vs. XMMO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) is 3.26%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) has a volatility of 7.82%. This indicates that IWR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWRXMMODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.26%

7.82%

-4.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.84%

15.54%

-5.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.39%

18.71%

-5.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.23%

21.45%

-3.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.36%

22.27%

-2.91%

IWR vs. XMMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWR has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than XMMO's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWR vs. XMMO - Dividend Comparison

IWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, more than XMMO's 0.60% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		1.15%1.29%1.27%1.43%1.59%1.04%1.28%1.43%1.98%1.52%1.72%1.59%
XMMO
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF		0.60%0.78%0.34%0.80%1.43%0.41%0.61%0.60%0.19%0.21%0.22%0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

IWR and XMMO have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XMMO has higher volatility (7.82%) compared to IWR (3.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWR dropped -58.78% vs XMMO's -55.37%.

On 10-year performance, XMMO leads with 19.73% vs 11.55% for IWR. On fees, IWR is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWR has been the lower-risk option at 3.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XMMO has performed better with a 19.73% return vs 11.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWR is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for XMMO.

IWR has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.60% for XMMO.

IWR is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while XMMO is Momentum. IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index, while XMMO tracks S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWR and 0.35% for XMMO.

XMMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 1.63), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWR and XMMO

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