OMFL vs. GXLC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

OMFL (Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and GXLC (Global X U.S. 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - OMFL tracks the Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index while GXLC tracks the Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OMFL charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for GXLC.

Performance

OMFL vs. GXLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OMFL achieves a 10.40% return, which is significantly higher than GXLC's 8.31% return.

OMFL

• 1D: -1.45%
• 1M: -1.15%
• YTD: 10.40%
• 6M: 9.24%
• 1Y: 20.52%
• 3Y*: 13.20%
• 5Y*: 8.89%
• 10Y*: —

GXLC

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: -1.12%
• YTD: 8.31%
• 6M: 7.39%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OMFL vs. GXLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
OMFL Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF	10.40%	1.92%
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF	8.31%	3.22%

Correlation

The correlation between OMFL and GXLC is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025	0.93

Return for Risk

OMFL vs. GXLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

OMFL

OMFL Risk / Return Rank: 55
OMFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
OMFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
OMFL Omega Ratio Rank: 49
OMFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
OMFL Martin Ratio Rank: 69

GXLC

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

OMFL vs. GXLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). 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.

	OMFL	GXLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.65	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.30	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.72	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.06	—	—

Drawdowns

OMFL vs. GXLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OMFL drawdown since its inception was -33.24%, which is greater than GXLC's maximum drawdown of -9.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFL and GXLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	OMFL	GXLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.24%	-9.08%	-24.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.58%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.52%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.44%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.57%	-3.05%	+0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.78%	-1.54%	-3.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.71%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	OMFL	GXLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.33%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.03%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.54%	13.85%	-1.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.81%	13.85%	+2.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.09%	13.85%	+6.24%

OMFL vs. GXLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

OMFL has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than GXLC's 0.02% expense ratio.

Dividends

OMFL vs. GXLC - Dividend Comparison

OMFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%, more than GXLC's 0.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF	0.65%	0.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
OMFL Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF	0.83%	0.80%	1.22%	1.37%	1.55%	0.95%	1.48%	1.53%	1.39%	0.32%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OMFL and GXLC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, OMFL and GXLC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, OMFL or GXLC?

On fees, GXLC is cheaper at 0.02% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, OMFL or GXLC?

GXLC is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for OMFL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OMFL or GXLC?

OMFL has the higher dividend yield at 0.83%, compared with 0.65% for GXLC.

What is the main difference between OMFL and GXLC?

OMFL tracks Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while GXLC tracks Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for OMFL and 0.02% for GXLC.