KLMT vs. SFGV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KLMT (Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF) and SFGV (Sequoia Global Value ETF) are both Global Equities funds. KLMT is passively managed, while SFGV is actively managed. Over the past year, KLMT returned 27.86% vs 25.44% for SFGV. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. KLMT charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for SFGV.

Performance

KLMT vs. SFGV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) and Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KLMT achieves a 12.04% return, which is significantly higher than SFGV's 11.37% return.

KLMT

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: 5.23%
• YTD: 12.04%
• 6M: 12.88%
• 1Y: 27.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SFGV

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 3.27%
• YTD: 11.37%
• 6M: 11.60%
• 1Y: 25.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

KLMT vs. SFGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	12.04%	21.31%	4.94%
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	11.37%	18.84%	2.70%

Correlation

The correlation between KLMT and SFGV is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2024	0.81

The correlation between KLMT and SFGV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

KLMT vs. SFGV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KLMT	SFGV
Technology	30.0%	11.4%
Financial Services	16.9%	10.5%
Industrials	10.2%	13.7%
Communication Services	9.6%	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	15.3%
Healthcare	8.0%	12.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	8.8%
Energy	4.1%	11.4%
Basic Materials	2.8%	6.0%
Real Estate	2.7%	5.9%
Utilities	2.0%	1.0%

Return for Risk

KLMT vs. SFGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

KLMT

KLMT Risk / Return Rank: 67
KLMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
KLMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
KLMT Omega Ratio Rank: 67
KLMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
KLMT Martin Ratio Rank: 70

SFGV

SFGV Risk / Return Rank: 66
SFGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
SFGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
SFGV Omega Ratio Rank: 66
SFGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
SFGV Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

KLMT vs. SFGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) and Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV). 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.

	KLMT	SFGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.22	2.21	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.10	3.17	-0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.39	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	3.06	-0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.75	11.43	+1.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KLMT vs. SFGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KLMT Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is comparable to the SFGV Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KLMT and SFGV, 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

	KLMT	SFGV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.22	2.21	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.28	1.33	-0.05

Drawdowns

KLMT vs. SFGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KLMT drawdown since its inception was -16.87%, which is greater than SFGV's maximum drawdown of -14.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KLMT and SFGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	KLMT	SFGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.87%	-14.51%	-2.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.54%	-8.36%	-1.18%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.78%	-0.38%	-0.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.91%	-1.89%	-0.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.19%	2.23%	-0.04%

Volatility

KLMT vs. SFGV - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) has a higher volatility of 3.76% compared to Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) at 2.95%. This indicates that KLMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SFGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KLMT	SFGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.76%	2.95%	+0.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.07%	8.62%	+1.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.61%	11.58%	+1.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.85%	13.26%	+2.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.85%	13.26%	+2.59%

KLMT vs. SFGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

KLMT has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than SFGV's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

KLMT vs. SFGV - Dividend Comparison

KLMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, less than SFGV's 2.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	1.75%	1.95%	0.85%
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	2.25%	2.52%	2.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KLMT and SFGV in my portfolio?

KLMT and SFGV have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KLMT or SFGV?

KLMT has higher volatility (3.76%) compared to SFGV (2.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KLMT dropped -16.87% vs SFGV's -14.51%.

Which ETF is better, KLMT or SFGV?

On 1-year performance, KLMT leads with 27.86% vs 25.44% for SFGV. On fees, KLMT is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, SFGV has been the lower-risk option at 2.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KLMT or SFGV?

Over the 1-year period, KLMT has performed better with a 27.86% return vs 25.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KLMT or SFGV?

KLMT is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for SFGV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KLMT or SFGV?

SFGV has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 1.75% for KLMT.

What is the main difference between KLMT and SFGV?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Sequoia. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for KLMT and 0.33% for SFGV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KLMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 2.21), 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.