PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
QVMT vs. NOBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

QVMT vs. NOBL

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

QVMT (Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF) and NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVMT is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality, Value & Momentum Multi-factor Index, while NOBL is a Dividend fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QVMT returned 12.79%/yr vs 9.64%/yr for NOBL. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QVMT charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for NOBL.

Performance

QVMT vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF (QVMT) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QVMT achieves a 16.07% return, which is significantly higher than NOBL's 5.31% return. Over the past 10 years, QVMT has outperformed NOBL with an annualized return of 12.79%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively lower 9.64% annualized return.

QVMT

1D
-1.55%
1M
1.85%
YTD
16.07%
6M
18.74%
1Y
34.61%
3Y*
21.89%
5Y*
11.24%
10Y*
12.79%

NOBL

1D
0.66%
1M
1.14%
YTD
5.31%
6M
5.39%
1Y
11.72%
3Y*
8.72%
5Y*
5.39%
10Y*
9.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QVMT vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QVMT
Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF		16.07%19.08%14.40%11.71%-5.61%35.27%-9.98%28.86%-9.51%18.77%
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF		5.31%6.84%6.72%8.09%-6.52%25.46%8.35%27.39%-3.26%21.02%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMT and NOBL is 0.70, 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

0.70

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.78

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2015

0.75

The correlation between QVMT and NOBL shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.81 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF

ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF

Often compared with QVMT:
QVMT vs. SPMOQVMT vs. SPVMQVMT vs. VOOQVMT vs. PBFRQVMT vs. HIBLQVMT vs. XCLRQVMT vs. SPHQ
Often compared with NOBL:
NOBL vs. SCHDNOBL vs. SPYNOBL vs. VIGNOBL vs. DGRONOBL vs. SDYNOBL vs. VOONOBL vs. KNG

Return for Risk

QVMT vs. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
QVMT
QVMT Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
QVMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QVMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
QVMT Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
QVMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
QVMT Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
NOBL
NOBL Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
NOBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NOBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
NOBL Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
NOBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
NOBL Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

QVMT vs. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF (QVMT) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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.

QVMTNOBLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.77
1.04

+1.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.93
1.58

+2.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.18

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.56

1.29

+4.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.73

3.34

+16.40

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QVMT vs. NOBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMT Sharpe Ratio is 2.77, which is higher than the NOBL Sharpe Ratio of 1.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMT and NOBL, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

QVMTNOBLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.77

1.04

+1.74

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

0.38

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.58

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.65

-0.07

Drawdowns

QVMT vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMT drawdown since its inception was -48.05%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMT and NOBL.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QVMTNOBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.05%

-35.43%

-12.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.25%

-9.11%

+2.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.42%

-15.36%

+0.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.95%

-17.92%

-4.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.05%

-35.43%

-12.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.55%

-4.36%

+2.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.34%

-3.48%

-2.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.76%

3.52%

-1.76%

Volatility

QVMT vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF (QVMT) has a higher volatility of 3.36% compared to ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) at 2.41%. This indicates that QVMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QVMTNOBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.36%

2.41%

+0.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.09%

8.05%

+1.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.53%

11.38%

+1.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.29%

14.39%

+2.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.05%

16.60%

+4.45%

QVMT vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVMT has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

QVMT vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison

QVMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.07%, which matches NOBL's 2.08% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF		2.08%2.14%2.05%2.09%1.94%1.89%2.14%1.89%2.37%1.74%2.13%2.02%
QVMT
Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF		2.07%2.42%2.71%3.05%2.49%2.31%2.70%2.23%2.48%2.37%1.11%0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

QVMT and NOBL have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QVMT has higher volatility (3.36%) compared to NOBL (2.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMT dropped -48.05% vs NOBL's -35.43%.

On 10-year performance, QVMT leads with 12.79% vs 9.64% for NOBL. On fees, QVMT is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 2.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QVMT has performed better with a 12.79% return vs 9.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QVMT is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for NOBL.

QVMT and NOBL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 2.07%.

QVMT is categorized as S&P 500, while NOBL is Dividend. QVMT tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value & Momentum Multi-factor Index, while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for QVMT and 0.35% for NOBL.

QVMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 vs 1.04), 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 QVMT and NOBL

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