QVMS vs. GSG
QVMS (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - QVMS is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QVMS returned 8.74%/yr vs 13.83%/yr for GSG. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QVMS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
QVMS vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QVMS achieves a 21.58% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 32.35% return.
QVMS
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 0.78%
- 6M
- 15.63%
- YTD
- 21.58%
- 1Y
- 30.36%
- 3Y*
- 14.95%
- 5Y*
- 8.74%
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- 3.60%
- 1M
- -0.20%
- 6M
- 28.24%
- YTD
- 32.35%
- 1Y
- 34.57%
- 3Y*
- 14.41%
- 5Y*
- 13.83%
- 10Y*
- 7.40%
QVMS vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 21.58% | 5.56% | 9.50% | 16.89% | -14.61% | 4.82% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 32.35% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -5.51% | 24.08% | 7.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between QVMS and GSG is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.19 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2021 | 0.17 |
The correlation between QVMS and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to 0.17 (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. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
QVMS
GSG
QVMS vs. GSG - 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 iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.
| QVMS | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.27 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.47 | 1.85 | +1.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.73 | 6.29 | +5.44 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QVMS vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QVMS | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.05% | -89.62% | +61.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.78% | -18.81% | +10.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.05% | -18.81% | -9.24% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.05% | -29.12% | +1.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.73% | -60.04% | +57.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.93% | -63.69% | +54.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.60% | 5.51% | -2.91% |
Volatility
QVMS vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) is 4.77%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 7.35%. This indicates that QVMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QVMS | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.77% | 7.35% | -2.58% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.40% | 21.50% | -9.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.73% | 23.48% | -5.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.16% | 22.80% | -1.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.16% | 22.00% | -0.84% |
QVMS vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
QVMS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
QVMS vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 1.16% | 1.10% | 1.53% | 1.51% | 1.58% | 0.64% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QVMS and GSG have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (7.35%) compared to QVMS (4.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 5-year performance, GSG leads with 13.83% vs 8.74% for QVMS. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QVMS has been the lower-risk option at 4.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GSG has performed better with a 13.83% return vs 8.74%. 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 0.75% for GSG.
QVMS has the higher dividend yield at 1.16%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
QVMS is categorized as Multi-factor, while GSG is Commodities. QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600, while GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMS and 0.75% for GSG.
QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.72 vs 1.48), 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 QVMS and GSG
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