QVMS vs. VFMF
QVMS (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and VFMF (Vanguard U.S. Multifactor ETF) are both Multi-factor funds. QVMS is passively managed, while VFMF is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVMS returned 16.78%/yr vs 22.47%/yr for VFMF. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QVMS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for VFMF.
Performance
QVMS vs. VFMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QVMS achieves a 20.25% return, which is significantly higher than VFMF's 16.88% return.
QVMS
- 1D
- -0.43%
- 1M
- 4.69%
- YTD
- 20.25%
- 6M
- 17.76%
- 1Y
- 35.14%
- 3Y*
- 16.78%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
VFMF
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 2.80%
- YTD
- 16.88%
- 6M
- 15.26%
- 1Y
- 34.79%
- 3Y*
- 22.47%
- 5Y*
- 14.43%
- 10Y*
- —
QVMS vs. VFMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 20.25% | 5.56% | 9.50% | 16.89% | -14.61% | 4.82% |
VFMF Vanguard U.S. Multifactor ETF | 16.88% | 17.38% | 15.60% | 18.52% | -5.70% | 7.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between QVMS and VFMF is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2021 | 0.94 |
The correlation between QVMS and VFMF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.
QVMS vs. VFMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QVMS
VFMF
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Communication Services
Financial Services
QVMS
VFMF
Technology
QVMS
VFMF
Industrials
QVMS
VFMF
Consumer Cyclical
QVMS
VFMF
Healthcare
QVMS
VFMF
Real Estate
QVMS
VFMF
Energy
QVMS
VFMF
Basic Materials
QVMS
VFMF
Consumer Defensive
QVMS
VFMF
Utilities
QVMS
VFMF
Communication Services
QVMS
VFMF
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. VFMF — Risk / Return Rank
QVMS
VFMF
QVMS vs. VFMF - 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 Vanguard U.S. Multifactor ETF (VFMF). 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 | VFMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.67 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.46 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.02 | 4.94 | -0.92 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.65 | 18.56 | -4.91 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QVMS vs. VFMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, smaller than the maximum VFMF drawdown of -41.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and VFMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QVMS | VFMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.05% | -41.34% | +13.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.78% | -7.08% | -1.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.05% | -20.57% | -7.48% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.57% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.43% | -0.78% | +0.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.01% | -5.71% | -3.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.58% | 1.88% | +0.70% |
Volatility
QVMS vs. VFMF - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) has a higher volatility of 5.07% compared to Vanguard U.S. Multifactor ETF (VFMF) at 3.56%. This indicates that QVMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VFMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QVMS | VFMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.07% | 3.56% | +1.51% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.45% | 9.31% | +3.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.83% | 13.25% | +4.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.23% | 18.06% | +3.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.23% | 21.11% | +0.12% |
QVMS vs. VFMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
QVMS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than VFMF's 0.18% 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
QVMS vs. VFMF - Dividend Comparison
QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, more than VFMF's 1.00% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 1.17% | 1.10% | 1.53% | 1.51% | 1.58% | 0.64% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
VFMF Vanguard U.S. Multifactor ETF | 1.00% | 1.54% | 1.60% | 1.78% | 2.21% | 1.39% | 1.56% | 1.61% | 1.22% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.92, QVMS and VFMF 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.
QVMS has higher volatility (5.07%) compared to VFMF (3.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs VFMF's -41.34%.
On 3-year performance, VFMF leads with 22.47% vs 16.78% for QVMS. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, VFMF has been the lower-risk option at 3.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, VFMF has performed better with a 22.47% return vs 16.78%. 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 0.18% for VFMF.
QVMS has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 1.00% for VFMF.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMS and 0.18% for VFMF.
VFMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.98), 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 VFMF
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