QVML vs. GARP
QVML (Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and GARP (iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP 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 GARP is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Quality GARP Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVML returned 22.47%/yr vs 33.60%/yr for GARP. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QVML charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for GARP.
Performance
QVML vs. GARP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QVML achieves a 11.17% return, which is significantly lower than GARP's 21.29% return.
QVML
- 1D
- -0.58%
- 1M
- 5.12%
- YTD
- 11.17%
- 6M
- 11.48%
- 1Y
- 27.60%
- 3Y*
- 22.47%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GARP
- 1D
- -0.72%
- 1M
- 11.92%
- YTD
- 21.29%
- 6M
- 21.80%
- 1Y
- 43.57%
- 3Y*
- 33.60%
- 5Y*
- 20.26%
- 10Y*
- —
QVML vs. GARP - 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% |
GARP iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF | 21.29% | 21.49% | 37.42% | 42.86% | -26.75% | 13.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between QVML and GARP is 0.90, 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 | 0.90 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021 | 0.93 |
The correlation between QVML and GARP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
QVML vs. GARP - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QVML
GARP
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
QVML
GARP
Financial Services
QVML
GARP
Communication Services
QVML
GARP
Healthcare
QVML
GARP
Industrials
QVML
GARP
Consumer Cyclical
QVML
GARP
Consumer Defensive
QVML
GARP
-
Energy
QVML
GARP
Utilities
QVML
GARP
Basic Materials
QVML
GARP
Real Estate
QVML
GARP
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. GARP — Risk / Return Rank
QVML
GARP
QVML vs. GARP - 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 iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF (GARP). 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 | GARP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.41 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.18 | 3.20 | -0.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.85 | 12.85 | +2.01 |
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 | GARP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.38 | 2.45 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.93 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.84 | 0.90 | -0.05 |
Drawdowns
QVML vs. GARP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QVML drawdown since its inception was -23.52%, smaller than the maximum GARP drawdown of -31.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVML and GARP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QVML | GARP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.52% | -31.34% | +7.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.73% | -13.69% | +4.96% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.71% | -23.73% | +5.02% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -30.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.58% | -0.73% | +0.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.40% | -7.36% | +1.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.86% | 3.40% | -1.54% |
Volatility
QVML vs. GARP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVML) is 2.91%, while iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF (GARP) has a volatility of 5.03%. This indicates that QVML experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GARP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QVML | GARP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.91% | 5.03% | -2.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.96% | 13.89% | -4.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.69% | 17.89% | -6.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 21.97% | -5.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 23.89% | -7.30% |
QVML vs. GARP - Expense Ratio Comparison
QVML has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than GARP's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
QVML vs. GARP - Dividend Comparison
QVML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, more than GARP's 0.25% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GARP iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF | 0.25% | 0.31% | 0.38% | 0.75% | 1.85% | 0.67% | 0.75% |
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 0.90, QVML and GARP 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.
GARP has higher volatility (5.03%) compared to QVML (2.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVML dropped -23.52% vs GARP's -31.34%.
On 3-year performance, GARP leads with 33.60% vs 22.47% for QVML. On fees, QVML is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, QVML has been the lower-risk option at 2.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GARP has performed better with a 33.60% return vs 22.47%. 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 0.15% for GARP.
QVML has the higher dividend yield at 0.99%, compared with 0.25% for GARP.
QVML is categorized as Multi-factor, while GARP is Large Cap Growth Equities. QVML tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value &Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while GARP tracks MSCI USA Quality GARP Select Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for QVML and 0.15% for GARP.
GARP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 2.38), 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 GARP
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