OMFS vs. OMFL
OMFS (Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and OMFL (Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OMFS is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while OMFL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, OMFS returned 6.12%/yr vs 8.89%/yr for OMFL. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OMFS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for OMFL.
Performance
OMFS vs. OMFL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, OMFS achieves a 18.54% return, which is significantly higher than OMFL's 10.40% return.
OMFS
- 1D
- -0.44%
- 1M
- 4.03%
- YTD
- 18.54%
- 6M
- 16.21%
- 1Y
- 33.25%
- 3Y*
- 15.98%
- 5Y*
- 6.12%
- 10Y*
- —
OMFL
- 1D
- -1.45%
- 1M
- -1.15%
- YTD
- 10.40%
- 6M
- 9.24%
- 1Y
- 20.52%
- 3Y*
- 13.20%
- 5Y*
- 8.89%
- 10Y*
- —
OMFS vs. OMFL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 18.54% | 13.34% | 3.98% | 15.12% | -17.29% | 28.60% | 15.02% | 27.12% | -9.01% | 3.83% |
OMFL Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 10.40% | 13.68% | 6.82% | 21.53% | -13.97% | 28.95% | 20.91% | 35.58% | -2.55% | 5.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between OMFS and OMFL 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 OMFS and OMFL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
OMFS vs. OMFL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
OMFS
OMFL
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
Financial Services
OMFS
OMFL
Technology
OMFS
OMFL
Industrials
OMFS
OMFL
Healthcare
OMFS
OMFL
Real Estate
OMFS
OMFL
Consumer Cyclical
OMFS
OMFL
Consumer Defensive
OMFS
OMFL
Energy
OMFS
OMFL
Basic Materials
OMFS
OMFL
Utilities
OMFS
OMFL
Communication Services
OMFS
OMFL
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
OMFS vs. OMFL — Risk / Return Rank
OMFS
OMFL
OMFS vs. OMFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL). 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.
| OMFS | OMFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.42 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.30 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.56 | 2.72 | +0.84 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.26 | 12.06 | +0.20 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
OMFS vs. OMFL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum OMFS drawdown since its inception was -42.50%, which is greater than OMFL's maximum drawdown of -33.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFS and OMFL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| OMFS | OMFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.50% | -33.24% | -9.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.38% | -7.58% | -1.80% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.35% | -15.52% | -6.83% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.22% | -22.44% | -6.78% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.44% | -2.57% | +2.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.42% | -4.78% | -5.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.72% | 1.71% | +1.01% |
Volatility
OMFS vs. OMFL - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) has a higher volatility of 5.05% compared to Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL) at 4.33%. This indicates that OMFS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OMFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| OMFS | OMFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.05% | 4.33% | +0.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.70% | 10.03% | +2.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.97% | 12.54% | +5.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.46% | 16.81% | +4.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.27% | 20.09% | +4.18% |
OMFS vs. OMFL - Expense Ratio Comparison
OMFS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than OMFL's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
OMFS vs. OMFL - Dividend Comparison
OMFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, more than OMFL's 0.83% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 1.09% | 0.80% | 1.87% | 1.27% | 1.84% | 0.66% | 1.07% | 1.29% | 1.50% | 0.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
OMFS and OMFL 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 (5.05%) compared to OMFL (4.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMFS dropped -42.50% vs OMFL's -33.24%.
On 5-year performance, OMFL leads with 8.89% vs 6.12% for OMFS. On fees, OMFL is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, OMFL has been the lower-risk option at 4.33%. 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 8.89% return vs 6.12%. 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 1.09%, compared with 0.83% for OMFL.
OMFS is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while OMFL is Large Cap Blend Equities. OMFS tracks Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while OMFL tracks Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for OMFS and 0.29% for OMFL.
OMFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 1.65), 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 OMFS and OMFL
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