PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
KONG vs. XMLV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

KONG vs. XMLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) and Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KONG achieves a -0.43% return, which is significantly lower than XMLV's 7.48% return.


KONG

1D
0.01%
1M
-1.90%
YTD
-0.43%
6M
-1.77%
1Y
3.78%
3Y*
7.83%
5Y*
10Y*

XMLV

1D
0.88%
1M
1.60%
YTD
7.48%
6M
6.25%
1Y
9.74%
3Y*
12.44%
5Y*
6.68%
10Y*
8.15%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KONG vs. XMLV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
KONG
Formidable Fortress ETF
-0.43%6.56%9.67%12.71%-9.63%5.15%
XMLV
Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF
7.48%5.55%17.08%1.86%-6.55%9.21%

Correlation

The correlation between KONG and XMLV is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.46

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

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 22, 2021

0.74

Over the past year, the correlation between KONG and XMLV has dropped to 0.46 - well below their long-term average of 0.74, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

KONG vs. XMLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
KONG
XMLV

Technology

35.2%
1.0%

Industrials

16.8%
9.8%

Healthcare

12.4%
2.1%

Communication Services

8.3%
1.0%

Financial Services

7.7%
24.2%

Real Estate

5.8%
33.7%

Energy

5.4%
3.7%

Basic Materials

3.6%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

2.7%
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

2.1%
2.5%

Utilities

-

18.5%

Technology

KONG
35.2%
XMLV
1.0%

Industrials

KONG
16.8%
XMLV
9.8%

Healthcare

KONG
12.4%
XMLV
2.1%

Communication Services

KONG
8.3%
XMLV
1.0%

Financial Services

KONG
7.7%
XMLV
24.2%

Real Estate

KONG
5.8%
XMLV
33.7%

Energy

KONG
5.4%
XMLV
3.7%

Basic Materials

KONG
3.6%
XMLV
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

KONG
2.7%
XMLV
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

KONG
2.1%
XMLV
2.5%

Utilities

KONG

-

XMLV
18.5%

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

KONG vs. XMLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

KONG
KONG Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
KONG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KONG Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
KONG Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
KONG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
KONG Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

XMLV
XMLV Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
XMLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMLV Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
XMLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMLV Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
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.

KONG vs. XMLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) and Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV). 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.


KONGXMLVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.16

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.44

1.39

-0.95

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.70

4.53

-2.83

KONG vs. XMLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KONG Sharpe Ratio is 0.35, which is lower than the XMLV Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KONG and XMLV, 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...

Drawdowns

KONG vs. XMLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KONG drawdown since its inception was -19.98%, smaller than the maximum XMLV drawdown of -39.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KONG and XMLV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


KONGXMLVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.98%

-39.86%

+19.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.54%

-7.03%

-1.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.48%

-13.80%

-1.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.86%

-0.31%

-3.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.78%

-4.25%

-1.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.23%

2.16%

+0.07%

Volatility

KONG vs. XMLV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) is 3.13%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) has a volatility of 4.18%. This indicates that KONG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


KONGXMLVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.13%

4.18%

-1.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.70%

7.86%

+0.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.89%

10.66%

+0.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.55%

14.49%

+0.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.55%

16.97%

-2.42%

KONG vs. XMLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

KONG has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than XMLV's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

KONG vs. XMLV - Dividend Comparison

KONG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than XMLV's 2.95% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
KONG
Formidable Fortress ETF
0.37%0.37%0.78%0.69%0.49%0.12%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XMLV
Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF
2.95%2.87%2.23%2.34%2.05%1.14%1.93%2.02%2.13%1.74%1.72%1.85%

Frequently Asked Questions


KONG and XMLV have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XMLV has higher volatility (4.18%) compared to KONG (3.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KONG dropped -19.98% vs XMLV's -39.86%.

On 3-year performance, XMLV leads with 12.44% vs 7.83% for KONG. On fees, XMLV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, KONG has been the lower-risk option at 3.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, XMLV has performed better with a 12.44% return vs 7.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XMLV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for KONG.

XMLV has the higher dividend yield at 2.95%, compared with 0.37% for KONG.

They also come from different issuers: Formidable Asset Management and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for KONG and 0.25% for XMLV.

XMLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.92 vs 0.35), 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 KONG and XMLV

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