OMFS vs. XLG
OMFS (Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OMFS is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, OMFS returned 5.57%/yr vs 16.24%/yr for XLG. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. OMFS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.
Performance
OMFS vs. XLG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, OMFS achieves a 13.70% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 7.57% return.
OMFS
- 1D
- -0.77%
- 1M
- 1.99%
- YTD
- 13.70%
- 6M
- 12.83%
- 1Y
- 28.51%
- 3Y*
- 14.17%
- 5Y*
- 5.57%
- 10Y*
- —
XLG
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- 4.22%
- YTD
- 7.57%
- 6M
- 7.32%
- 1Y
- 28.54%
- 3Y*
- 24.46%
- 5Y*
- 16.24%
- 10Y*
- 17.27%
OMFS vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 7.57% | 19.51% | 33.49% | 38.16% | -24.29% | 30.77% | 24.15% | 32.04% | -3.59% | 3.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between OMFS and XLG is 0.56, 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 | 0.56 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2017 | 0.56 |
The correlation between OMFS and XLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.
OMFS vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
OMFS
XLG
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Real Estate
-
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Utilities
-
Communication Services
Financial Services
OMFS
XLG
Industrials
OMFS
XLG
Technology
OMFS
XLG
Healthcare
OMFS
XLG
Real Estate
OMFS
XLG
-
Consumer Cyclical
OMFS
XLG
Energy
OMFS
XLG
Consumer Defensive
OMFS
XLG
Basic Materials
OMFS
XLG
Utilities
OMFS
XLG
-
Communication Services
OMFS
XLG
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. XLG — Risk / Return Rank
OMFS
XLG
OMFS vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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 | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.53 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.38 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.05 | 2.31 | +0.74 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.48 | 8.66 | +1.82 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| OMFS | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.62 | 2.15 | -0.53 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 | 0.87 | -0.61 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.92 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.41 | 0.62 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
OMFS vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum OMFS drawdown since its inception was -42.50%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFS and XLG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| OMFS | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.50% | -52.39% | +9.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.38% | -12.41% | +3.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.35% | -20.70% | -1.65% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.22% | -28.02% | -1.20% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -30.46% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.92% | -1.44% | -0.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.49% | -7.64% | -2.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.73% | 3.30% | -0.57% |
Volatility
OMFS vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 3.19%. This indicates that OMFS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| OMFS | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.97% | 3.19% | +1.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.44% | 9.80% | +2.64% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.64% | 13.33% | +4.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.46% | 18.68% | +2.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.31% | 18.84% | +5.47% |
OMFS vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison
OMFS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
OMFS vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison
OMFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, more than XLG's 0.60% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 0.60% | 0.64% | 0.72% | 0.97% | 1.34% | 0.94% | 1.25% | 1.58% | 2.00% | 1.85% | 2.00% | 2.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
OMFS and XLG have a correlation of 0.56, 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 XLG (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMFS dropped -42.50% vs XLG's -52.39%.
On 5-year performance, XLG leads with 16.24% vs 5.57% for OMFS. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, XLG has performed better with a 16.24% return vs 5.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for OMFS.
OMFS has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.60% for XLG.
OMFS is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. OMFS tracks Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for OMFS and 0.20% for XLG.
XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 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.
Find the right allocation for OMFS and XLG
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