PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RWJ vs. XMMO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RWJ vs. XMMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWJ achieves a 15.88% return, which is significantly lower than XMMO's 23.73% return. Over the past 10 years, RWJ has underperformed XMMO with an annualized return of 13.02%, while XMMO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.73% annualized return.


RWJ

1D
-1.07%
1M
1.90%
YTD
15.88%
6M
14.97%
1Y
36.55%
3Y*
16.43%
5Y*
7.73%
10Y*
13.02%

XMMO

1D
0.62%
1M
6.87%
YTD
23.73%
6M
25.73%
1Y
36.97%
3Y*
32.10%
5Y*
16.69%
10Y*
19.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RWJ vs. XMMO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RWJ
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF
15.88%7.75%11.81%16.21%-10.97%52.82%20.83%20.29%-16.95%5.30%
XMMO
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF
23.73%13.04%38.03%20.39%-16.02%16.69%29.17%36.78%6.12%37.18%

Correlation

The correlation between RWJ and XMMO is 0.65, 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

0.65

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

0.74

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

0.80

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

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2008

0.76

The correlation between RWJ and XMMO shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (1 year) to 0.80 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RWJ vs. XMMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RWJ
XMMO

Consumer Cyclical

23.9%
4.6%

Industrials

16.2%
41.1%

Healthcare

11.2%
6.3%

Financial Services

11.0%
2.4%

Technology

9.9%
16.7%

Energy

7.4%
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%
0.5%

Basic Materials

5.2%
7.2%

Real Estate

4.0%
6.1%

Communication Services

3.3%
1.6%

Utilities

0.9%
5.8%

Consumer Cyclical

RWJ
23.9%
XMMO
4.6%

Industrials

RWJ
16.2%
XMMO
41.1%

Healthcare

RWJ
11.2%
XMMO
6.3%

Financial Services

RWJ
11.0%
XMMO
2.4%

Technology

RWJ
9.9%
XMMO
16.7%

Energy

RWJ
7.4%
XMMO
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

RWJ
6.9%
XMMO
0.5%

Basic Materials

RWJ
5.2%
XMMO
7.2%

Real Estate

RWJ
4.0%
XMMO
6.1%

Communication Services

RWJ
3.3%
XMMO
1.6%

Utilities

RWJ
0.9%
XMMO
5.8%

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

RWJ vs. XMMO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

RWJ
RWJ Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
RWJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWJ Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
RWJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWJ Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

XMMO
XMMO Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
XMMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMMO Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
XMMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMMO Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

RWJ vs. XMMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) 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.


RWJXMMODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.35

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.25

4.45

-1.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.39

18.21

-7.82

RWJ vs. XMMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the XMMO Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWJ and XMMO, 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


RWJXMMODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.90

1.99

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.33

0.78

-0.45

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

0.89

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

0.58

-0.12

Drawdowns

RWJ vs. XMMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWJ drawdown since its inception was -55.97%, roughly equal to the maximum XMMO drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWJ and XMMO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RWJXMMODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.97%

-55.37%

-0.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.31%

-8.34%

-2.97%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.29%

-24.93%

-4.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.29%

-27.91%

-1.38%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-51.33%

-36.74%

-14.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.07%

0.00%

-1.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.24%

-9.45%

+0.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.53%

2.04%

+1.49%

Volatility

RWJ vs. XMMO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) is 4.64%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) has a volatility of 7.82%. This indicates that RWJ 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


RWJXMMODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.64%

7.82%

-3.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.29%

15.54%

-3.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.40%

18.71%

+0.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.71%

21.45%

+2.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.14%

22.27%

+3.87%

RWJ vs. XMMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWJ has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than XMMO's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

RWJ vs. XMMO - Dividend Comparison

RWJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, more than XMMO's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RWJ
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF
1.01%1.11%1.15%1.34%1.02%0.61%0.89%1.22%1.44%1.11%0.60%0.74%
XMMO
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF
0.60%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


RWJ and XMMO have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XMMO has higher volatility (7.82%) compared to RWJ (4.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWJ dropped -55.97% vs XMMO's -55.37%.

On 10-year performance, XMMO leads with 19.73% vs 13.02% for RWJ. On fees, XMMO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RWJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.64%. 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 19.73% return vs 13.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XMMO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWJ.

RWJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.60% for XMMO.

RWJ is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while XMMO is Momentum. RWJ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index, while XMMO tracks S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWJ and 0.35% for XMMO.

XMMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 1.90), 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 RWJ 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