OMFS vs. ECML

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OMFS (Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and ECML (EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. OMFS is passively managed, while ECML is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, OMFS returned 14.17%/yr vs 15.57%/yr for ECML. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OMFS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for ECML.

Performance

OMFS vs. ECML - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OMFS achieves a 13.70% return, which is significantly lower than ECML's 14.39% return.

OMFS

• 1D: -0.77%
• 1M: 1.99%
• YTD: 13.70%
• 6M: 12.83%
• 1Y: 28.51%
• 3Y*: 14.17%
• 5Y*: 5.57%
• 10Y*: —

ECML

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 1.49%
• YTD: 14.39%
• 6M: 14.23%
• 1Y: 26.84%
• 3Y*: 15.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OMFS vs. ECML - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF	13.70%	13.34%	3.98%	13.75%
ECML EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF	14.39%	6.82%	2.37%	24.36%

Correlation

The correlation between OMFS and ECML is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 19, 2023	0.82

The correlation between OMFS and ECML has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

OMFS vs. ECML - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OMFS	ECML
Financial Services	24.3%	-
Industrials	14.7%	14.2%
Technology	14.2%	5.3%
Healthcare	13.2%	16.6%
Real Estate	12.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	23.8%
Energy	4.1%	13.2%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	12.4%
Basic Materials	2.8%	10.6%
Utilities	1.1%	1.4%
Communication Services	1.1%	3.9%

Return for Risk

OMFS vs. ECML — Risk / Return Rank

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

OMFS

OMFS Risk / Return Rank: 52
OMFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
OMFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
OMFS Omega Ratio Rank: 44
OMFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
OMFS Martin Ratio Rank: 59

ECML

ECML Risk / Return Rank: 61
ECML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
ECML Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
ECML Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ECML Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
ECML Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

OMFS vs. ECML - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML). 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.

	OMFS	ECML	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.62	1.86	-0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.41	2.85	-0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.32	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.05	3.85	-0.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.48	11.05	-0.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OMFS vs. ECML - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OMFS Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is comparable to the ECML Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OMFS and ECML, 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

	OMFS	ECML	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.62	1.86	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.26	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	0.86	-0.44

Drawdowns

OMFS vs. ECML - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OMFS drawdown since its inception was -42.50%, which is greater than ECML's maximum drawdown of -24.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFS and ECML.

Drawdown Indicators

	OMFS	ECML	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.50%	-24.66%	-17.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.38%	-7.01%	-2.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.35%	-24.66%	+2.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.22%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.92%	-0.27%	-1.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.49%	-5.88%	-4.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.73%	2.44%	+0.29%

Volatility

OMFS vs. ECML - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) at 3.84%. This indicates that OMFS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECML based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OMFS	ECML	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.97%	3.84%	+1.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.44%	9.75%	+2.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.64%	14.56%	+3.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.46%	18.39%	+3.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.31%	18.39%	+5.92%

OMFS vs. ECML - Expense Ratio Comparison

OMFS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than ECML's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

OMFS vs. ECML - Dividend Comparison

OMFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, less than ECML's 1.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ECML EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF	1.20%	1.38%	0.98%	0.77%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF	0.91%	0.80%	1.87%	1.27%	1.84%	0.66%	1.07%	1.29%	1.50%	0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OMFS and ECML in my portfolio?

OMFS and ECML have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OMFS or ECML?

OMFS has higher volatility (4.97%) compared to ECML (3.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMFS dropped -42.50% vs ECML's -24.66%.

Which ETF is better, OMFS or ECML?

On 3-year performance, ECML leads with 15.57% vs 14.17% for OMFS. On fees, OMFS is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, ECML has been the lower-risk option at 3.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OMFS or ECML?

Over the 3-year period, ECML has performed better with a 15.57% return vs 14.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OMFS or ECML?

OMFS is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ECML.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OMFS or ECML?

ECML has the higher dividend yield at 1.20%, compared with 0.91% for OMFS.

What is the main difference between OMFS and ECML?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Euclidean. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for OMFS and 0.95% for ECML.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.62), 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.