QVML vs. FLRG
QVML (Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and FLRG (Fidelity U.S. Multifactor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVML is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality, Value &Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while FLRG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Fidelity U.S. Multifactor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVML returned 22.47%/yr vs 19.48%/yr for FLRG. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. QVML charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for FLRG.
Performance
QVML vs. FLRG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QVML achieves a 11.17% return, which is significantly higher than FLRG's 9.13% return.
QVML
- 1D
- -0.58%
- 1M
- 5.12%
- YTD
- 11.17%
- 6M
- 11.48%
- 1Y
- 27.60%
- 3Y*
- 22.47%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FLRG
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 4.02%
- YTD
- 9.13%
- 6M
- 8.95%
- 1Y
- 18.92%
- 3Y*
- 19.48%
- 5Y*
- 13.03%
- 10Y*
- —
QVML vs. FLRG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVML Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 11.17% | 17.74% | 25.87% | 22.19% | -16.25% | 12.56% |
FLRG Fidelity U.S. Multifactor ETF | 9.13% | 13.92% | 23.36% | 18.31% | -10.98% | 11.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between QVML and FLRG is 0.94, 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 | 0.94 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021 | 0.95 |
The correlation between QVML and FLRG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
QVML vs. FLRG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QVML
FLRG
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
QVML
FLRG
Financial Services
QVML
FLRG
Communication Services
QVML
FLRG
Healthcare
QVML
FLRG
Industrials
QVML
FLRG
Consumer Cyclical
QVML
FLRG
Consumer Defensive
QVML
FLRG
Energy
QVML
FLRG
Utilities
QVML
FLRG
Basic Materials
QVML
FLRG
Real Estate
QVML
FLRG
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
QVML vs. FLRG — Risk / Return Rank
QVML
FLRG
QVML vs. FLRG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVML) and Fidelity U.S. Multifactor ETF (FLRG). 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.
| QVML | FLRG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.50 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.34 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.18 | 2.65 | +0.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.85 | 10.46 | +4.39 |
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
| QVML | FLRG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.38 | 1.88 | +0.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.86 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.84 | 1.04 | -0.20 |
Drawdowns
QVML vs. FLRG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QVML drawdown since its inception was -23.52%, which is greater than FLRG's maximum drawdown of -19.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVML and FLRG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QVML | FLRG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.52% | -19.64% | -3.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.73% | -7.16% | -1.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.71% | -16.53% | -2.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.58% | -0.37% | -0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.40% | -3.74% | -1.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.86% | 1.81% | +0.05% |
Volatility
QVML vs. FLRG - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVML) has a higher volatility of 2.91% compared to Fidelity U.S. Multifactor ETF (FLRG) at 2.42%. This indicates that QVML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLRG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QVML | FLRG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.91% | 2.42% | +0.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.96% | 7.57% | +1.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.69% | 10.14% | +1.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 15.18% | +1.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 15.02% | +1.57% |
QVML vs. FLRG - Expense Ratio Comparison
QVML has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than FLRG's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
QVML vs. FLRG - Dividend Comparison
QVML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, less than FLRG's 1.34% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLRG Fidelity U.S. Multifactor ETF | 1.34% | 1.42% | 1.42% | 1.39% | 1.62% | 1.36% | 1.47% |
QVML Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 0.99% | 1.10% | 1.15% | 1.43% | 1.72% | 0.62% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.94, QVML and FLRG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
QVML has higher volatility (2.91%) compared to FLRG (2.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVML dropped -23.52% vs FLRG's -19.64%.
On 3-year performance, QVML leads with 22.47% vs 19.48% for FLRG. On fees, QVML is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, FLRG has been the lower-risk option at 2.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, QVML has performed better with a 22.47% return vs 19.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QVML is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for FLRG.
FLRG has the higher dividend yield at 1.34%, compared with 0.99% for QVML.
QVML is categorized as Multi-factor, while FLRG is Large Cap Growth Equities. QVML tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value &Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while FLRG tracks Fidelity U.S. Multifactor Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for QVML and 0.29% for FLRG.
QVML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.88), 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 QVML and FLRG
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