QVMS vs. XLG

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

QVMS (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVMS is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QVMS returned 9.14%/yr vs 14.02%/yr for XLG. Their 0.64 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. QVMS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

QVMS vs. XLG - 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 S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QVMS achieves a 24.00% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 4.68% 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%

XLG

• 1D: 1.74%
• 1M: 1.81%
• 6M: 4.68%
• YTD: 4.68%
• 1Y: 17.86%
• 3Y*: 21.61%
• 5Y*: 14.02%
• 10Y*: 16.44%
• ALL TIME*: 11.40%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF	$15.20K	$71.85K	$64.18K
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	$59.56M	$59.06M	$102.51M

QVMS vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF	24.00%	5.56%	9.50%	16.89%	-14.61%	4.82%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	4.68%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	14.01%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMS and XLG is 0.52, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.52
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2021	0.64

The correlation between QVMS and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.64 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QVMS vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QVMS	XLG
Financial Services	18.1%	10.3%
Industrials	16.2%	1.9%
Technology	15.2%	49.8%
Consumer Cyclical	13.1%	9.3%
Healthcare	10.4%	6.8%
Real Estate	7.6%	-
Energy	5.9%	2.5%
Basic Materials	4.9%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	5.1%
Utilities	2.1%	0.7%
Communication Services	1.9%	13.0%

Return for Risk

QVMS vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QVMS

QVMS Risk / Return Rank: 88
QVMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
QVMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
QVMS Omega Ratio Rank: 83
QVMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
QVMS Martin Ratio Rank: 90

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 45
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 47
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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. XLG - 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 S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	1.22	+0.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.17	1.74	+1.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.22	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.32	1.44	+2.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.61	4.49	+10.12

QVMS vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMS Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is higher than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMS and XLG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

QVMS vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	QVMS	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.05%	-52.39%	+24.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.78%	-12.41%	+3.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.05%	-20.70%	-7.35%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.05%	-28.02%	-0.03%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.80%	-4.09%	+3.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.85%	-7.62%	-1.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.59%	3.98%	-1.39%

Volatility

QVMS vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) is 3.96%, while Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) has a volatility of 5.30%. This indicates that QVMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QVMS	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.96%	5.30%	-1.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.15%	11.66%	+0.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.58%	14.73%	+2.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.08%	18.91%	+2.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.09%	18.93%	+2.16%

QVMS vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVMS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than XLG's 0.20% 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. XLG - Dividend Comparison

QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, more than XLG's 0.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF	1.13%	1.10%	1.53%	1.51%	1.58%	0.64%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.64%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QVMS and XLG in my portfolio?

QVMS and XLG have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QVMS or XLG?

XLG has higher volatility (5.30%) compared to QVMS (3.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, QVMS or XLG?

On 5-year performance, XLG leads with 14.02% vs 9.14% for QVMS. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QVMS has been the lower-risk option at 3.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QVMS or XLG?

Over the 5-year period, XLG has performed better with a 14.02% return vs 9.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QVMS or XLG?

QVMS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XLG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QVMS or XLG?

QVMS has the higher dividend yield at 1.13%, compared with 0.64% for XLG.

What is the main difference between QVMS and XLG?

QVMS is categorized as Multi-factor, while XLG is S&P 500. QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMS and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.22), 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.