OMFL vs. OMFS
OMFL (Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and OMFS (Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OMFL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while OMFS is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, OMFL returned 9.36%/yr vs 6.52%/yr for OMFS. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OMFL charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for OMFS.
Performance
OMFL vs. OMFS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, OMFL achieves a 12.03% return, which is significantly lower than OMFS's 19.07% return.
OMFL
- 1D
- -0.35%
- 1M
- 0.30%
- YTD
- 12.03%
- 6M
- 11.06%
- 1Y
- 23.68%
- 3Y*
- 13.75%
- 5Y*
- 9.36%
- 10Y*
- —
OMFS
- 1D
- 1.13%
- 1M
- 4.50%
- YTD
- 19.07%
- 6M
- 15.99%
- 1Y
- 36.23%
- 3Y*
- 16.15%
- 5Y*
- 6.52%
- 10Y*
- —
OMFL vs. OMFS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OMFL Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 12.03% | 13.68% | 6.82% | 21.53% | -13.97% | 28.95% | 20.91% | 35.58% | -2.55% | 5.12% |
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 19.07% | 13.34% | 3.98% | 15.12% | -17.29% | 28.60% | 15.02% | 27.12% | -9.01% | 3.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between OMFL and OMFS is 0.75, 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 | 0.75 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2017 | 0.80 |
The correlation between OMFL and OMFS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
OMFL vs. OMFS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
OMFL
OMFS
Technology
Communication Services
Financial Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Utilities
Technology
OMFL
OMFS
Communication Services
OMFL
OMFS
Financial Services
OMFL
OMFS
Healthcare
OMFL
OMFS
Industrials
OMFL
OMFS
Consumer Cyclical
OMFL
OMFS
Consumer Defensive
OMFL
OMFS
Energy
OMFL
OMFS
Basic Materials
OMFL
OMFS
Real Estate
OMFL
OMFS
Utilities
OMFL
OMFS
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
OMFL vs. OMFS — Risk / Return Rank
OMFL
OMFS
OMFL vs. OMFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL) and Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS). 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 | OMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.34 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.14 | 3.88 | -0.74 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.98 | 13.35 | +0.62 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
OMFL vs. OMFS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum OMFL drawdown since its inception was -33.24%, smaller than the maximum OMFS drawdown of -42.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFL and OMFS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| OMFL | OMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.24% | -42.50% | +9.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.58% | -9.38% | +1.80% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.52% | -22.35% | +6.83% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.44% | -29.22% | +6.78% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.13% | 0.00% | -1.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.78% | -10.43% | +5.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.70% | 2.72% | -1.02% |
Volatility
OMFL vs. OMFS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL) is 4.06%, while Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) has a volatility of 5.00%. This indicates that OMFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than OMFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| OMFL | OMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.06% | 5.00% | -0.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.93% | 12.70% | -2.77% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.47% | 18.00% | -5.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.80% | 21.46% | -4.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.09% | 24.28% | -4.19% |
OMFL vs. OMFS - Expense Ratio Comparison
OMFL has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than OMFS's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
OMFL vs. OMFS - Dividend Comparison
OMFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, less than OMFS's 1.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OMFL Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 0.98% | 0.80% | 1.22% | 1.37% | 1.55% | 0.95% | 1.48% | 1.53% | 1.39% | 0.32% |
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 1.23% | 0.80% | 1.87% | 1.27% | 1.84% | 0.66% | 1.07% | 1.29% | 1.50% | 0.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
OMFL and OMFS have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
OMFS has higher volatility (5.00%) compared to OMFL (4.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMFL dropped -33.24% vs OMFS's -42.50%.
On 5-year performance, OMFL leads with 9.36% vs 6.52% for OMFS. On fees, OMFL is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, OMFL has been the lower-risk option at 4.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, OMFL has performed better with a 9.36% return vs 6.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
OMFL is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for OMFS.
OMFS has the higher dividend yield at 1.23%, compared with 0.98% for OMFL.
OMFL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while OMFS is Small Cap Value Equities. OMFL tracks Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while OMFS tracks Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for OMFL and 0.39% for OMFS.
OMFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.91), 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.
Find the right allocation for OMFL and OMFS
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