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

Performance

QVMS vs. OMFS - 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 Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS). 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 21.97% return, which is significantly higher than OMFS's 18.33% return.


QVMS

1D
-0.04%
1M
-0.81%
6M
15.44%
YTD
21.97%
1Y
35.49%
3Y*
13.91%
5Y*
8.50%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
7.95%

OMFS

1D
-0.51%
1M
-1.48%
6M
11.99%
YTD
18.33%
1Y
33.45%
3Y*
12.70%
5Y*
7.25%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
10.34%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$494.23K$429.77K$649.60K
$15.87K$74.79K$63.13K

QVMS vs. OMFS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
QVMS
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF
21.97%5.56%9.50%16.89%-14.61%4.82%
OMFS
Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
18.33%13.34%3.98%15.12%-17.29%2.41%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMS and OMFS is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


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

0.92

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

0.93

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2021

0.94

The correlation between QVMS and OMFS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

QVMS vs. OMFS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QVMS
OMFS

Financial Services

18.1%
26.7%

Industrials

16.2%
11.0%

Technology

15.2%
13.9%

Consumer Cyclical

13.1%
8.9%

Healthcare

10.4%
15.1%

Real Estate

7.6%
12.4%

Energy

5.9%
3.5%

Basic Materials

4.9%
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
3.2%

Utilities

2.1%
0.7%

Communication Services

1.9%
1.2%

Financial Services

QVMS
18.1%
OMFS
26.7%

Industrials

QVMS
16.2%
OMFS
11.0%

Technology

QVMS
15.2%
OMFS
13.9%

Consumer Cyclical

QVMS
13.1%
OMFS
8.9%

Healthcare

QVMS
10.4%
OMFS
15.1%

Real Estate

QVMS
7.6%
OMFS
12.4%

Energy

QVMS
5.9%
OMFS
3.5%

Basic Materials

QVMS
4.9%
OMFS
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

QVMS
3.9%
OMFS
3.2%

Utilities

QVMS
2.1%
OMFS
0.7%

Communication Services

QVMS
1.9%
OMFS
1.2%

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. OMFS — Risk / Return Rank

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

QVMS
QVMS Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
QVMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QVMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
QVMS Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
QVMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
QVMS Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

OMFS
OMFS Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
OMFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMFS Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
OMFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMFS Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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. OMFS - 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 Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS). 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.


QVMSOMFSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.30

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.85

3.29

+0.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.04

11.43

+1.61

QVMS vs. OMFS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is comparable to the OMFS Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMS and OMFS, 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. OMFS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, smaller than the maximum OMFS drawdown of -42.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and OMFS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QVMSOMFSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.05%

-42.50%

+14.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.78%

-9.38%

+0.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.05%

-22.35%

-5.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.05%

-29.22%

+1.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.42%

-2.10%

-0.32%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.86%

-10.31%

+1.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.59%

2.70%

-0.11%

Volatility

QVMS vs. OMFS - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) and Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) have volatilities of 3.70% and 3.76%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QVMSOMFSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.70%

3.76%

-0.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.07%

12.21%

-0.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.57%

17.70%

-0.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.06%

21.22%

-0.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.08%

24.16%

-3.08%

QVMS vs. OMFS - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVMS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than OMFS's 0.39% expense ratio.


Dividends

QVMS vs. OMFS - Dividend Comparison

QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, more than OMFS's 1.09% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
OMFS
Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
1.09%0.80%1.87%1.27%1.84%0.66%1.07%1.29%1.50%0.34%
QVMS
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF
1.15%1.10%1.53%1.51%1.58%0.64%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, QVMS and OMFS 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.

OMFS has higher volatility (3.76%) compared to QVMS (3.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs OMFS's -42.50%.

On 5-year performance, QVMS leads with 8.50% vs 7.25% for OMFS. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QVMS has performed better with a 8.50% return vs 7.25%. 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 OMFS.

QVMS has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 1.09% for OMFS.

QVMS is categorized as Multi-factor, while OMFS is Small Cap Value Equities. QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600, while OMFS tracks Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMS and 0.39% for OMFS.

QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.74), 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 OMFS

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