PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QVMT vs. XCLR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QVMT vs. XCLR - 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 Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF (XCLR). 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 19.11% return, which is significantly higher than XCLR's 1.45% return.


QVMT

1D
-2.72%
1M
1.92%
YTD
19.11%
6M
19.12%
1Y
34.42%
3Y*
22.94%
5Y*
12.95%
10Y*
13.28%

XCLR

1D
-0.86%
1M
-0.46%
YTD
1.45%
6M
0.79%
1Y
11.53%
3Y*
13.33%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QVMT vs. XCLR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
QVMT
Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF
19.11%19.08%14.40%11.71%-5.61%5.36%
XCLR
Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF
1.45%10.25%20.67%15.64%-12.93%3.30%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMT and XCLR is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.49

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

0.53

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021

0.64

The correlation between QVMT and XCLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.64 (all time), 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.


Return for Risk

QVMT vs. XCLR — 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: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QVMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
QVMT Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
QVMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
QVMT Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

XCLR
XCLR Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
XCLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCLR Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
XCLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCLR Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
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. XCLR - 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 Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF (XCLR). 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.


QVMTXCLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.25

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.53

1.40

+4.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.46

5.62

+13.84

QVMT vs. XCLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMT Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is higher than the XCLR Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMT and XCLR, 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

QVMT vs. XCLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMT drawdown since its inception was -48.05%, which is greater than XCLR's maximum drawdown of -14.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMT and XCLR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QVMTXCLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.05%

-14.63%

-33.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.25%

-8.29%

+2.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.42%

-12.46%

-1.96%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.72%

-1.32%

-1.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.31%

-4.65%

-1.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.77%

2.06%

-0.29%

Volatility

QVMT vs. XCLR - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF (QVMT) has a higher volatility of 5.11% compared to Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF (XCLR) at 1.31%. This indicates that QVMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XCLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QVMTXCLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.11%

1.31%

+3.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.83%

5.99%

+3.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.16%

8.39%

+4.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.30%

10.39%

+6.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.10%

10.39%

+10.71%

QVMT vs. XCLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVMT has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than XCLR'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

QVMT vs. XCLR - Dividend Comparison

QVMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than XCLR's 12.96% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QVMT
Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF
1.83%2.42%2.71%3.05%2.49%2.31%2.70%2.23%2.48%2.37%1.11%0.54%
XCLR
Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF
12.96%13.15%18.76%1.40%1.01%1.70%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QVMT and XCLR have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QVMT has higher volatility (5.11%) compared to XCLR (1.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMT dropped -48.05% vs XCLR's -14.63%.

On 3-year performance, QVMT leads with 22.94% vs 13.33% for XCLR. On fees, QVMT is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, XCLR has been the lower-risk option at 1.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, QVMT has performed better with a 22.94% return vs 13.33%. 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 0.25% for XCLR.

XCLR has the higher dividend yield at 12.96%, compared with 1.83% for QVMT.

QVMT is categorized as S&P 500, while XCLR is Equity Hedged. QVMT tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value & Momentum Multi-factor Index, while XCLR tracks Cboe S&P 500 3-Month Collar 95-110 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for QVMT and 0.25% for XCLR.

QVMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 1.38), 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 XCLR

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