QVMM vs. QVMS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

QVMM (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and QVMS (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF) are both Multi-factor funds from Invesco - QVMM tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Quality, Value & Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross while QVMS tracks the S&P Small Cap 600. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVMM returned 17.02%/yr vs 16.95%/yr for QVMS. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

QVMM vs. QVMS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMM) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QVMM achieves a 16.39% return, which is significantly lower than QVMS's 20.78% return.

QVMM

• 1D: 0.43%
• 1M: 3.88%
• YTD: 16.39%
• 6M: 14.05%
• 1Y: 28.74%
• 3Y*: 17.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QVMS

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 5.14%
• YTD: 20.78%
• 6M: 17.79%
• 1Y: 37.18%
• 3Y*: 16.95%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QVMM vs. QVMS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QVMM Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF	16.39%	8.82%	13.36%	15.43%	-13.06%	6.20%
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF	20.78%	5.56%	9.50%	16.89%	-14.61%	4.82%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMM and QVMS 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	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2021	0.96

The correlation between QVMM and QVMS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

QVMM vs. QVMS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QVMM	QVMS
Industrials	26.1%	16.3%
Technology	15.6%	16.7%
Financial Services	14.7%	18.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	13.4%
Healthcare	9.2%	11.1%
Real Estate	7.4%	7.1%
Energy	4.9%	5.6%
Basic Materials	4.8%	5.0%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	2.8%
Utilities	3.2%	2.1%
Communication Services	0.8%	1.9%

Return for Risk

QVMM vs. QVMS — Risk / Return Rank

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

QVMM

QVMM Risk / Return Rank: 62
QVMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
QVMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
QVMM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
QVMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
QVMM Martin Ratio Rank: 69

QVMS

QVMS Risk / Return Rank: 71
QVMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
QVMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
QVMS Omega Ratio Rank: 60
QVMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
QVMS Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

QVMM vs. QVMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMM) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS). 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.

	QVMM	QVMS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	2.10	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.69	3.04	-0.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.36	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.48	4.25	-0.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.50	14.44	-1.94

QVMM vs. QVMS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the QVMS Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMM and QVMS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

QVMM vs. QVMS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMM drawdown since its inception was -24.00%, smaller than the maximum QVMS drawdown of -28.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMM and QVMS.

Drawdown Indicators

	QVMM	QVMS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.00%	-28.05%	+4.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.30%	-8.78%	+0.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.00%	-28.05%	+4.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.02%	-9.01%	+1.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.31%	2.58%	-0.27%

Volatility

QVMM vs. QVMS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMM) is 4.43%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) has a volatility of 5.02%. This indicates that QVMM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QVMS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QVMM	QVMS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.43%	5.02%	-0.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.57%	12.43%	-0.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.58%	17.86%	-2.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.46%	21.23%	-1.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.46%	21.23%	-1.77%

QVMM vs. QVMS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QVMM and QVMS have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

QVMM vs. QVMS - Dividend Comparison

QVMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, more than QVMS's 1.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QVMM Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF	1.43%	1.32%	1.29%	1.42%	1.51%	0.60%
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF	1.37%	1.10%	1.53%	1.51%	1.58%	0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QVMM and QVMS in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, QVMM and QVMS 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.

Which is riskier, QVMM or QVMS?

QVMS has higher volatility (5.02%) compared to QVMM (4.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMM dropped -24.00% vs QVMS's -28.05%.

Which ETF is better, QVMM or QVMS?

On 3-year performance, QVMM leads with 17.02% vs 16.95% for QVMS. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, QVMM has been the lower-risk option at 4.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QVMM or QVMS?

Over the 3-year period, QVMM has performed better with a 17.02% return vs 16.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QVMM or QVMS?

QVMM and QVMS have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QVMM or QVMS?

QVMM has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 1.37% for QVMS.

What is the main difference between QVMM and QVMS?

QVMM tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality, Value & Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 1.86), 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.