RFV vs. XMMO
RFV (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF) and XMMO (Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFV is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while XMMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFV returned 12.75%/yr vs 20.42%/yr for XMMO. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.
Performance
RFV vs. XMMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFV achieves a 12.44% return, which is significantly lower than XMMO's 25.95% return. Over the past 10 years, RFV has underperformed XMMO with an annualized return of 12.75%, while XMMO has yielded a comparatively higher 20.42% annualized return.
RFV
- 1D
- 0.15%
- 1M
- 3.08%
- YTD
- 12.44%
- 6M
- 10.55%
- 1Y
- 22.29%
- 3Y*
- 15.14%
- 5Y*
- 11.17%
- 10Y*
- 12.75%
XMMO
- 1D
- 1.31%
- 1M
- 5.63%
- YTD
- 25.95%
- 6M
- 23.04%
- 1Y
- 40.85%
- 3Y*
- 32.12%
- 5Y*
- 16.76%
- 10Y*
- 20.42%
RFV vs. XMMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF | 12.44% | 7.66% | 5.63% | 30.26% | -3.99% | 33.02% | 9.61% | 24.98% | -18.56% | 14.74% |
XMMO Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF | 25.95% | 13.04% | 38.03% | 20.39% | -16.02% | 16.69% | 29.17% | 36.78% | 6.12% | 37.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFV and XMMO is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2006 | 0.74 |
The correlation between RFV and XMMO shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.80 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
RFV vs. XMMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RFV
XMMO
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Technology
Energy
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Healthcare
Communication Services
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
RFV
XMMO
Financial Services
RFV
XMMO
Technology
RFV
XMMO
Energy
RFV
XMMO
Industrials
RFV
XMMO
Basic Materials
RFV
XMMO
Consumer Defensive
RFV
XMMO
Real Estate
RFV
XMMO
Healthcare
RFV
XMMO
Communication Services
RFV
-
XMMO
Utilities
RFV
-
XMMO
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
RFV vs. XMMO — Risk / Return Rank
RFV
XMMO
RFV vs. XMMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). 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.
| RFV | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.91 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.36 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.79 | 4.92 | -3.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.27 | 19.55 | -14.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RFV vs. XMMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than XMMO's maximum drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and XMMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFV | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -71.82% | -55.37% | -16.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.51% | -8.34% | -4.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.65% | -24.93% | +0.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.65% | -27.91% | +3.26% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -52.24% | -36.74% | -15.50% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.61% | 0.00% | -2.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.77% | -9.43% | -0.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.24% | 2.09% | +2.15% |
Volatility
RFV vs. XMMO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) is 4.26%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) has a volatility of 8.04%. This indicates that RFV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFV | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.26% | 8.04% | -3.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.90% | 16.60% | -4.70% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.05% | 19.82% | -1.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.98% | 21.62% | +0.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.99% | 22.35% | +2.64% |
RFV vs. XMMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both RFV and XMMO have an expense ratio of 0.35%.
Dividends
RFV vs. XMMO - Dividend Comparison
RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, more than XMMO's 0.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF | 2.24% | 2.07% | 1.31% | 1.27% | 2.05% | 1.60% | 1.52% | 1.71% | 1.39% | 1.36% | 0.88% | 1.79% |
XMMO Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF | 0.74% | 0.78% | 0.34% | 0.80% | 1.43% | 0.41% | 0.61% | 0.60% | 0.19% | 0.21% | 0.22% | 0.64% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFV and XMMO have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XMMO has higher volatility (8.04%) compared to RFV (4.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs XMMO's -55.37%.
On 10-year performance, XMMO leads with 20.42% vs 12.75% for RFV. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, RFV has been the lower-risk option at 4.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XMMO has performed better with a 20.42% return vs 12.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RFV and XMMO have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.
RFV has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 0.74% for XMMO.
RFV is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while XMMO is Momentum. RFV tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while XMMO tracks S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index.
XMMO 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 RFV and XMMO
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