PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
OMFS vs. SQLV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

OMFS vs. SQLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OMFS achieves a 13.70% return, which is significantly higher than SQLV's 12.76% return.


OMFS

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

SQLV

1D
-1.66%
1M
1.74%
YTD
12.76%
6M
12.70%
1Y
25.91%
3Y*
12.10%
5Y*
6.01%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

OMFS vs. SQLV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
OMFS
Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
13.70%13.34%3.98%15.12%-17.29%28.60%15.02%27.12%-9.01%3.71%
SQLV
Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF
12.76%2.50%4.76%21.21%-12.86%37.14%7.13%17.41%-10.55%6.46%

Correlation

The correlation between OMFS and SQLV is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.86

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.90

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2017

0.73

The correlation between OMFS and SQLV shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (all time) to 0.90 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

OMFS vs. SQLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
OMFS
SQLV

Financial Services

24.3%
18.7%

Industrials

14.7%
10.3%

Technology

14.2%
15.4%

Healthcare

13.2%
18.0%

Real Estate

12.2%
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
14.2%

Energy

4.1%
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.8%
8.7%

Basic Materials

2.8%
4.2%

Utilities

1.1%
0.3%

Communication Services

1.1%
5.3%

Financial Services

OMFS
24.3%
SQLV
18.7%

Industrials

OMFS
14.7%
SQLV
10.3%

Technology

OMFS
14.2%
SQLV
15.4%

Healthcare

OMFS
13.2%
SQLV
18.0%

Real Estate

OMFS
12.2%
SQLV
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

OMFS
8.4%
SQLV
14.2%

Energy

OMFS
4.1%
SQLV
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

OMFS
3.8%
SQLV
8.7%

Basic Materials

OMFS
2.8%
SQLV
4.2%

Utilities

OMFS
1.1%
SQLV
0.3%

Communication Services

OMFS
1.1%
SQLV
5.3%

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. SQLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

OMFS
OMFS Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
OMFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMFS Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
OMFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMFS Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank

SQLV
SQLV Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
SQLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SQLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
SQLV Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
SQLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
SQLV Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
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. SQLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV). 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.


OMFSSQLVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.25

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.05

2.94

+0.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.48

8.77

+1.71

OMFS vs. SQLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OMFS Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is comparable to the SQLV Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OMFS and SQLV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


OMFSSQLVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.62

1.48

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.26

0.29

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.41

0.38

+0.03

Drawdowns

OMFS vs. SQLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OMFS drawdown since its inception was -42.50%, smaller than the maximum SQLV drawdown of -48.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFS and SQLV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


OMFSSQLVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.50%

-48.34%

+5.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.38%

-8.84%

-0.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.35%

-26.86%

+4.51%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.22%

-26.86%

-2.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.92%

-1.66%

-0.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.49%

-8.95%

-1.54%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.73%

2.96%

-0.23%

Volatility

OMFS vs. SQLV - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) at 4.30%. This indicates that OMFS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SQLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


OMFSSQLVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.97%

4.30%

+0.67%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.44%

11.36%

+1.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.64%

17.70%

-0.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.46%

20.99%

+0.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.31%

23.36%

+0.95%

OMFS vs. SQLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

OMFS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than SQLV's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

OMFS vs. SQLV - Dividend Comparison

OMFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, less than SQLV's 1.01% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
SQLV
Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF
1.01%1.15%1.11%1.09%1.24%1.12%1.22%1.20%1.08%0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions


OMFS and SQLV have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

OMFS has higher volatility (4.97%) compared to SQLV (4.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMFS dropped -42.50% vs SQLV's -48.34%.

On 5-year performance, SQLV leads with 6.01% vs 5.57% for OMFS. On fees, OMFS is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, SQLV has been the lower-risk option at 4.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, SQLV has performed better with a 6.01% return vs 5.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

OMFS is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SQLV.

SQLV has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.91% for OMFS.

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for OMFS and 0.60% for SQLV.

OMFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.62 vs 1.48), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for OMFS and SQLV

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