QVMS vs. XMHQ
QVMS (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVMS is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600, while XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVMS returned 15.26%/yr vs 16.36%/yr for XMHQ. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QVMS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMHQ.
Performance
QVMS vs. XMHQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QVMS achieves a 16.84% return, which is significantly higher than XMHQ's 8.95% return.
QVMS
- 1D
- 1.26%
- 1M
- 2.06%
- YTD
- 16.84%
- 6M
- 16.99%
- 1Y
- 34.90%
- 3Y*
- 15.26%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XMHQ
- 1D
- 0.23%
- 1M
- 3.20%
- YTD
- 8.95%
- 6M
- 9.84%
- 1Y
- 15.30%
- 3Y*
- 16.36%
- 5Y*
- 9.42%
- 10Y*
- 12.78%
QVMS vs. XMHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 16.84% | 5.56% | 9.50% | 16.89% | -14.61% | 4.45% |
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 8.95% | 4.71% | 16.79% | 29.51% | -12.42% | 4.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between QVMS and XMHQ is 0.88, 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 | 0.88 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021 | 0.91 |
The correlation between QVMS and XMHQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
QVMS vs. XMHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QVMS
XMHQ
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Communication Services
Financial Services
QVMS
XMHQ
Industrials
QVMS
XMHQ
Technology
QVMS
XMHQ
Consumer Cyclical
QVMS
XMHQ
Healthcare
QVMS
XMHQ
Energy
QVMS
XMHQ
Real Estate
QVMS
XMHQ
-
Basic Materials
QVMS
XMHQ
Consumer Defensive
QVMS
XMHQ
Utilities
QVMS
XMHQ
Communication Services
QVMS
XMHQ
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. XMHQ — Risk / Return Rank
QVMS
XMHQ
QVMS vs. XMHQ - 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 MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ). 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 | XMHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.99 | 0.99 | +1.00 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.90 | 1.56 | +1.34 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.18 | +0.17 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.87 | 1.72 | +2.15 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.10 | 5.04 | +8.05 |
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 | XMHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.99 | 0.99 | +1.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.46 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.62 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | 0.45 | -0.11 |
Drawdowns
QVMS vs. XMHQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, smaller than the maximum XMHQ drawdown of -58.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and XMHQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QVMS | XMHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.05% | -58.19% | +30.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.78% | -8.85% | +0.07% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.05% | -24.56% | -3.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.47% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.37% | +0.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.11% | -9.29% | +0.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.60% | 3.02% | -0.42% |
Volatility
QVMS vs. XMHQ - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) have volatilities of 4.84% and 4.70%, 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
| QVMS | XMHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.84% | 4.70% | +0.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.04% | 11.12% | +0.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.62% | 15.46% | +2.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.26% | 20.74% | +0.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.26% | 20.71% | +0.55% |
QVMS vs. XMHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
QVMS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than XMHQ's 0.25% 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. XMHQ - Dividend Comparison
QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, more than XMHQ's 0.55% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 1.12% | 1.10% | 1.53% | 1.51% | 1.58% | 0.64% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 0.55% | 0.64% | 5.20% | 0.73% | 1.72% | 1.00% | 1.12% | 1.22% | 1.59% | 1.06% | 1.63% | 1.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QVMS and XMHQ have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QVMS has higher volatility (4.84%) compared to XMHQ (4.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs XMHQ's -58.19%.
On 3-year performance, XMHQ leads with 16.36% vs 15.26% for QVMS. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, XMHQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 16.36% return vs 15.26%. 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 0.25% for XMHQ.
QVMS has the higher dividend yield at 1.12%, compared with 0.55% for XMHQ.
QVMS is categorized as Multi-factor, while XMHQ is Mid Cap Blend Equities. QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600, while XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMS and 0.25% for XMHQ.
QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 0.99), 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 XMHQ
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