QVMS vs. MFDX
QVMS (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and MFDX (PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor International Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVMS is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600, while MFDX is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Developed Ex-U.S. Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVMS returned 16.26%/yr vs 19.02%/yr for MFDX. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QVMS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for MFDX.
Performance
QVMS vs. MFDX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QVMS achieves a 17.44% return, which is significantly higher than MFDX's 10.33% return.
QVMS
- 1D
- 1.27%
- 1M
- 2.14%
- YTD
- 17.44%
- 6M
- 16.16%
- 1Y
- 33.90%
- 3Y*
- 16.26%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MFDX
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 1.57%
- YTD
- 10.33%
- 6M
- 12.61%
- 1Y
- 23.30%
- 3Y*
- 19.02%
- 5Y*
- 10.04%
- 10Y*
- —
QVMS vs. MFDX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 17.44% | 5.56% | 9.50% | 16.89% | -14.61% | 4.45% |
MFDX PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor International Equity ETF | 10.33% | 34.27% | 4.40% | 17.54% | -10.27% | 1.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between QVMS and MFDX is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021 | 0.71 |
The correlation between QVMS and MFDX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.
QVMS vs. MFDX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QVMS
MFDX
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Communication Services
Financial Services
QVMS
MFDX
Industrials
QVMS
MFDX
Technology
QVMS
MFDX
Consumer Cyclical
QVMS
MFDX
Healthcare
QVMS
MFDX
Energy
QVMS
MFDX
Real Estate
QVMS
MFDX
Basic Materials
QVMS
MFDX
Consumer Defensive
QVMS
MFDX
Utilities
QVMS
MFDX
Communication Services
QVMS
MFDX
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. MFDX — Risk / Return Rank
QVMS
MFDX
QVMS vs. MFDX - 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 PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor International Equity ETF (MFDX). 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.
| QVMS | MFDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.43 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.31 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.88 | 2.19 | +1.68 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.08 | 8.72 | +4.36 |
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
| QVMS | MFDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.94 | 1.71 | +0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.67 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.35 | 0.55 | -0.20 |
Drawdowns
QVMS vs. MFDX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, smaller than the maximum MFDX drawdown of -36.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and MFDX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QVMS | MFDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.05% | -36.05% | +8.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.78% | -10.66% | +1.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.05% | -11.62% | -16.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.58% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.30% | +1.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.10% | -6.50% | -2.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.60% | 2.68% | -0.08% |
Volatility
QVMS vs. MFDX - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) has a higher volatility of 4.68% compared to PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor International Equity ETF (MFDX) at 4.31%. This indicates that QVMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MFDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QVMS | MFDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.68% | 4.31% | +0.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.11% | 11.35% | +0.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.60% | 13.69% | +3.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.25% | 15.03% | +6.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.25% | 16.41% | +4.84% |
QVMS vs. MFDX - Expense Ratio Comparison
QVMS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than MFDX's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
QVMS vs. MFDX - Dividend Comparison
QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, less than MFDX's 2.78% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFDX PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor International Equity ETF | 2.78% | 2.97% | 3.16% | 3.12% | 2.85% | 2.99% | 1.58% | 2.88% | 2.13% | 0.71% |
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 1.12% | 1.10% | 1.53% | 1.51% | 1.58% | 0.64% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QVMS and MFDX have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QVMS has higher volatility (4.68%) compared to MFDX (4.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs MFDX's -36.05%.
On 3-year performance, MFDX leads with 19.02% vs 16.26% for QVMS. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, MFDX has been the lower-risk option at 4.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MFDX has performed better with a 19.02% return vs 16.26%. 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 0.39% for MFDX.
MFDX has the higher dividend yield at 2.78%, compared with 1.12% for QVMS.
QVMS is categorized as Multi-factor, while MFDX is Foreign Large Cap Equities. QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600, while MFDX tracks RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Developed Ex-U.S. Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMS and 0.39% for MFDX.
QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 1.71), 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 MFDX
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