POWA vs. GXLC
POWA (Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF) and GXLC (Global X U.S. 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - POWA tracks the Bloomberg Pricing Power Index while GXLC tracks the Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. POWA charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for GXLC.
Performance
POWA vs. GXLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, POWA achieves a -3.46% return, which is significantly lower than GXLC's 8.31% return.
POWA
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- -0.36%
- YTD
- -3.46%
- 6M
- -4.44%
- 1Y
- 2.51%
- 3Y*
- 9.97%
- 5Y*
- 7.09%
- 10Y*
- 10.17%
GXLC
- 1D
- -1.32%
- 1M
- -1.12%
- YTD
- 8.31%
- 6M
- 7.39%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
POWA vs. GXLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
POWA Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF | -3.46% | 1.00% |
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF | 8.31% | 3.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between POWA and GXLC is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.69 |
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
POWA vs. GXLC — Risk / Return Rank
POWA
GXLC
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
POWA vs. GXLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF (POWA) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). 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.
| POWA | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.26 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.65 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
POWA vs. GXLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum POWA drawdown since its inception was -47.91%, which is greater than GXLC's maximum drawdown of -9.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for POWA and GXLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| POWA | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.91% | -9.08% | -38.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.00% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.75% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.53% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.56% | -3.05% | -4.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.24% | -1.54% | -4.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.89% | — | — |
Volatility
POWA vs. GXLC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| POWA | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.15% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.98% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.82% | 13.85% | -2.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.93% | 13.85% | +0.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.05% | 13.85% | +2.20% |
POWA vs. GXLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
POWA has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than GXLC's 0.02% expense ratio.
Dividends
POWA vs. GXLC - Dividend Comparison
POWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.97%, more than GXLC's 0.65% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF | 0.65% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
POWA Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF | 0.97% | 0.94% | 0.79% | 1.60% | 1.48% | 1.06% | 1.34% | 1.16% | 1.39% | 1.63% | 2.18% | 3.31% |
Frequently Asked Questions
POWA and GXLC have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GXLC is cheaper at 0.02% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GXLC is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for POWA.
POWA has the higher dividend yield at 0.97%, compared with 0.65% for GXLC.
POWA tracks Bloomberg Pricing Power Index, while GXLC tracks Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for POWA and 0.02% for GXLC.
Find the right allocation for POWA and GXLC
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