QVMT vs. XLG
QVMT (Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both S&P 500 funds from Invesco - QVMT tracks the S&P 500 Quality, Value & Momentum Multi-factor Index while XLG tracks the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QVMT returned 12.93%/yr vs 16.49%/yr for XLG. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QVMT charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.
Performance
QVMT vs. XLG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QVMT achieves a 17.80% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 3.75% return. Over the past 10 years, QVMT has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of 12.93%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 16.49% annualized return.
QVMT
- 1D
- -1.52%
- 1M
- -1.75%
- 6M
- 15.40%
- YTD
- 17.80%
- 1Y
- 29.59%
- 3Y*
- 20.71%
- 5Y*
- 12.96%
- 10Y*
- 12.93%
XLG
- 1D
- -1.13%
- 1M
- 0.12%
- 6M
- 2.98%
- YTD
- 3.75%
- 1Y
- 17.41%
- 3Y*
- 20.97%
- 5Y*
- 13.84%
- 10Y*
- 16.49%
QVMT vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMT Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF | 17.80% | 19.08% | 14.40% | 11.71% | -5.61% | 35.27% | -9.98% | 28.86% | -9.51% | 18.77% |
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 3.75% | 19.51% | 33.49% | 38.16% | -24.29% | 30.77% | 24.15% | 32.04% | -3.59% | 23.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between QVMT and XLG is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 9, 2015 | 0.53 |
The correlation between QVMT and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (3 years) to 0.55 (10 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.
Return for Risk
QVMT vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank
QVMT
XLG
QVMT vs. XLG - 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 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.
| QVMT | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.22 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.75 | 1.41 | +3.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.94 | 4.71 | +11.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QVMT vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QVMT drawdown since its inception was -48.05%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMT and XLG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QVMT | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.05% | -52.39% | +4.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.25% | -12.41% | +6.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.42% | -20.70% | +6.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.95% | -28.02% | +6.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.05% | -30.46% | -17.59% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.57% | -4.94% | +0.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.30% | -7.63% | +1.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.87% | 3.71% | -1.84% |
Volatility
QVMT vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF (QVMT) has a higher volatility of 7.79% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 4.83%. This indicates that QVMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QVMT | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.79% | 4.83% | +2.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.32% | 11.06% | +0.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.35% | 14.13% | +0.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.45% | 18.83% | -1.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.18% | 18.87% | +2.31% |
QVMT vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison
QVMT has a 0.13% 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
QVMT vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison
QVMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, more than XLG's 0.65% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMT Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF | 1.85% | 2.42% | 2.71% | 3.05% | 2.49% | 2.31% | 2.70% | 2.23% | 2.48% | 2.37% | 1.11% | 0.54% |
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 0.65% | 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
QVMT and XLG have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QVMT has higher volatility (7.79%) compared to XLG (4.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMT dropped -48.05% vs XLG's -52.39%.
On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 16.49% vs 12.93% for QVMT. On fees, QVMT is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XLG has performed better with a 16.49% return vs 12.93%. 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 0.20% for XLG.
QVMT has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 0.65% for XLG.
QVMT tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value & Momentum Multi-factor Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for QVMT and 0.20% for XLG.
QVMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.24), 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 QVMT and XLG
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