OMFS vs. MYLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OMFS (Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and MYLD (Cambria Micro And Smallcap Shareholder Yield ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. OMFS is passively managed, while MYLD is actively managed. Over the past year, OMFS returned 28.51% vs 36.15% for MYLD. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OMFS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for MYLD.

Performance

OMFS vs. MYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and Cambria Micro And Smallcap Shareholder Yield ETF (MYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with OMFS having a 13.70% return and MYLD slightly lower at 13.45%.

OMFS

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

MYLD

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: 1.39%
• YTD: 13.45%
• 6M: 13.96%
• 1Y: 36.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OMFS vs. MYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF	13.70%	13.34%	7.44%
MYLD Cambria Micro And Smallcap Shareholder Yield ETF	13.45%	10.48%	6.95%

Correlation

The correlation between OMFS and MYLD is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2024	0.84

The correlation between OMFS and MYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

OMFS vs. MYLD — 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

MYLD

MYLD Risk / Return Rank: 63
MYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
MYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
MYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 59
MYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
MYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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. MYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and Cambria Micro And Smallcap Shareholder Yield ETF (MYLD). 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	MYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.62	2.00	-0.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.41	2.95	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.36	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.05	3.66	-0.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.48	10.64	-0.16
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. MYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OMFS Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is comparable to the MYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OMFS and MYLD, 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	MYLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.62	2.00	-0.38
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	0.65	-0.24

Drawdowns

OMFS vs. MYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OMFS drawdown since its inception was -42.50%, which is greater than MYLD's maximum drawdown of -28.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFS and MYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	OMFS	MYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.50%	-28.23%	-14.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.38%	-9.92%	+0.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.35%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.22%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.92%	-1.42%	-0.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.49%	-6.00%	-4.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.73%	3.41%	-0.68%

Volatility

OMFS vs. MYLD - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and Cambria Micro And Smallcap Shareholder Yield ETF (MYLD) have volatilities of 4.97% and 4.76%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OMFS	MYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.97%	4.76%	+0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.44%	11.94%	+0.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.64%	18.22%	-0.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.46%	19.95%	+1.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.31%	19.95%	+4.36%

OMFS vs. MYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

OMFS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than MYLD's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

OMFS vs. MYLD - Dividend Comparison

OMFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, less than MYLD's 2.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MYLD Cambria Micro And Smallcap Shareholder Yield ETF	2.10%	6.22%	3.26%	0.00%	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 MYLD in my portfolio?

OMFS and MYLD have a correlation of 0.79, 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 MYLD?

OMFS has higher volatility (4.97%) compared to MYLD (4.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMFS dropped -42.50% vs MYLD's -28.23%.

Which ETF is better, OMFS or MYLD?

On 1-year performance, MYLD leads with 36.15% vs 28.51% for OMFS. On fees, OMFS is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, MYLD has been the lower-risk option at 4.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OMFS or MYLD?

Over the 1-year period, MYLD has performed better with a 36.15% return vs 28.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OMFS or MYLD?

OMFS is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for MYLD.

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

MYLD has the higher dividend yield at 2.10%, compared with 0.91% for OMFS.

What is the main difference between OMFS and MYLD?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for OMFS and 0.59% for MYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 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.