PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QVMS vs. CAOS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QVMS vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QVMS achieves a 24.00% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.75% return.


QVMS

1D
1.66%
1M
0.84%
6M
16.16%
YTD
24.00%
1Y
37.75%
3Y*
15.04%
5Y*
9.14%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
8.28%

CAOS

1D
-0.01%
1M
-0.02%
6M
0.18%
YTD
0.75%
1Y
1.71%
3Y*
3.56%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
4.69%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$7.09M$5.54M$5.04M
$15.20K$71.85K$64.18K

QVMS vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
QVMS
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF
24.00%5.56%9.50%6.52%
CAOS
Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF
0.75%2.55%5.33%7.43%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMS and CAOS is -0.30, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.30

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

-0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023

0.01

The correlation between QVMS and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.30 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

QVMS vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QVMS
QVMS Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
QVMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QVMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
QVMS Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
QVMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
QVMS Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

CAOS
CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QVMS vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.


QVMSCAOSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.22

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.32

2.27

+2.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.61

4.99

+9.62

QVMS vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMS Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMS and CAOS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QVMS vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and CAOS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QVMSCAOSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.05%

-3.89%

-24.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.78%

-0.76%

-8.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.05%

-3.60%

-24.45%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.80%

-1.14%

+0.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.85%

-0.92%

-7.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.59%

0.34%

+2.25%

Volatility

QVMS vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) has a higher volatility of 3.96% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.46%. This indicates that QVMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QVMSCAOSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.96%

0.46%

+3.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.15%

1.07%

+11.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.58%

1.57%

+16.01%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.08%

4.17%

+16.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.09%

4.17%

+16.92%

QVMS vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVMS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.


Dividends

QVMS vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
CAOS
Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QVMS
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF
1.13%1.10%1.53%1.51%1.58%0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions


QVMS and CAOS have a correlation of -0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QVMS has higher volatility (3.96%) compared to CAOS (0.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

On 3-year performance, QVMS leads with 15.04% vs 3.56% for CAOS. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, QVMS has performed better with a 15.04% return vs 3.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QVMS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for CAOS.

QVMS has the higher dividend yield at 1.13%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

QVMS is categorized as Multi-factor, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMS and 0.63% for CAOS.

QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.10), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QVMS and CAOS

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