QVMM vs. XLG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QVMM (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVMM is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality, Value & Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVMM returned 16.66%/yr vs 21.35%/yr for XLG. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QVMM charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

QVMM vs. XLG - 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 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QVMM achieves a 15.32% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 1.60% return.

QVMM

• 1D: -0.92%
• 1M: 2.93%
• YTD: 15.32%
• 6M: 13.35%
• 1Y: 26.52%
• 3Y*: 16.66%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XLG

• 1D: -1.88%
• 1M: -5.41%
• YTD: 1.60%
• 6M: 0.73%
• 1Y: 19.95%
• 3Y*: 21.35%
• 5Y*: 14.28%
• 10Y*: 16.94%

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

QVMM vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QVMM Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF	15.32%	8.82%	13.36%	15.43%	-13.06%	6.20%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	1.60%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	14.01%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMM and XLG is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2021	0.69

The correlation between QVMM and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (1 year) to 0.69 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QVMM vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QVMM	XLG
Industrials	26.1%	1.9%
Technology	15.6%	46.8%
Financial Services	14.7%	9.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	11.2%
Healthcare	9.2%	7.0%
Real Estate	7.4%	-
Energy	4.9%	2.4%
Basic Materials	4.8%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	5.2%
Utilities	3.2%	-
Communication Services	0.8%	16.0%

Return for Risk

QVMM vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QVMM

QVMM Risk / Return Rank: 59
QVMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
QVMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QVMM Omega Ratio Rank: 51
QVMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
QVMM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 39
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 41
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 38

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. XLG - 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 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.

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	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	1.44	+0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.50	1.98	+0.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.26	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.21	1.61	+1.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.53	5.77	+5.76

QVMM vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is comparable to the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMM and XLG, 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. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMM drawdown since its inception was -24.00%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMM and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	QVMM	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.00%	-52.39%	+28.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.30%	-12.41%	+4.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.00%	-20.70%	-3.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.02%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.92%	-6.91%	+5.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.01%	-7.63%	+0.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.31%	3.46%	-1.15%

Volatility

QVMM vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMM) is 4.58%, while Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) has a volatility of 5.04%. This indicates that QVMM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QVMM	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.58%	5.04%	-0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.61%	10.74%	+0.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.58%	13.98%	+1.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.46%	18.79%	+0.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.46%	18.88%	+0.58%

QVMM vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVMM has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than XLG's 0.20% 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

QVMM vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

QVMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, more than XLG's 0.66% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QVMM Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF	1.15%	1.32%	1.29%	1.42%	1.51%	0.60%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.66%	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

Can I hold both QVMM and XLG in my portfolio?

QVMM and XLG have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QVMM or XLG?

XLG has higher volatility (5.04%) compared to QVMM (4.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMM dropped -24.00% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, QVMM or XLG?

On 3-year performance, XLG leads with 21.35% vs 16.66% for QVMM. On fees, QVMM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QVMM has been the lower-risk option at 4.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QVMM or XLG?

Over the 3-year period, XLG has performed better with a 21.35% return vs 16.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QVMM or XLG?

QVMM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XLG.

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

QVMM has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.66% for XLG.

What is the main difference between QVMM and XLG?

QVMM is categorized as Multi-factor, while XLG is S&P 500. QVMM tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality, Value & Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMM and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QVMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.44), 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.