RWK vs. XMHQ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

RWK (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF) and XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWK is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index, while XMHQ is a Quality Factor fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWK returned 13.00%/yr vs 12.83%/yr for XMHQ. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. RWK charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMHQ.

Performance

RWK vs. XMHQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWK achieves a 18.15% return, which is significantly higher than XMHQ's 12.54% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with RWK having a 13.00% annualized return and XMHQ not far behind at 12.83%.

RWK

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 1.66%
• 6M: 13.42%
• YTD: 18.15%
• 1Y: 28.53%
• 3Y*: 15.25%
• 5Y*: 12.08%
• 10Y*: 13.00%
• ALL TIME*: 11.54%

XMHQ

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: 1.40%
• 6M: 8.28%
• YTD: 12.54%
• 1Y: 16.17%
• 3Y*: 13.54%
• 5Y*: 10.18%
• 10Y*: 12.83%
• ALL TIME*: 9.48%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF	$2.23M	$2.59M	$2.47M
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	$19.95M	$19.43M	$20.53M

RWK vs. XMHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF	18.15%	10.27%	11.94%	23.76%	-8.19%	34.31%	11.06%	28.20%	-14.65%	13.39%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	12.54%	4.71%	16.79%	29.51%	-12.42%	20.98%	26.61%	27.18%	-9.08%	15.64%

Correlation

The correlation between RWK and XMHQ is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 2008	0.83

The correlation between RWK and XMHQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWK vs. XMHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWK	XMHQ
Industrials	23.3%	30.2%
Consumer Cyclical	21.0%	9.4%
Financial Services	13.0%	15.1%
Technology	11.8%	18.5%
Consumer Defensive	11.1%	1.1%
Energy	4.9%	6.9%
Healthcare	4.7%	16.0%
Basic Materials	4.4%	1.5%
Real Estate	2.9%	-
Utilities	1.6%	2.2%
Communication Services	1.4%	1.4%

Return for Risk

RWK vs. XMHQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RWK

RWK Risk / Return Rank: 69
RWK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
RWK Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
RWK Omega Ratio Rank: 67
RWK Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
RWK Martin Ratio Rank: 64

XMHQ

XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 41
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 35
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 44

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RWK vs. XMHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ). 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.

	RWK	XMHQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	0.95	+0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.41	1.47	+0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.17	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.34	1.64	+0.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.78	4.86	+2.92

RWK vs. XMHQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWK Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is higher than the XMHQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWK and XMHQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RWK vs. XMHQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWK drawdown since its inception was -56.49%, roughly equal to the maximum XMHQ drawdown of -58.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWK and XMHQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWK	XMHQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.49%	-58.19%	+1.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.14%	-8.85%	-2.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.58%	-24.56%	-0.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.58%	-25.47%	+0.89%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.20%	-36.90%	-9.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.30%	-0.02%	-1.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.49%	-9.22%	+1.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.35%	2.97%	+0.38%

Volatility

RWK vs. XMHQ - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) has a higher volatility of 4.08% compared to Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) at 3.13%. This indicates that RWK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMHQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWK	XMHQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.08%	3.13%	+0.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.96%	11.07%	+0.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.49%	15.30%	+1.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.94%	20.57%	+0.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.88%	20.63%	+2.25%

RWK vs. XMHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWK has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than XMHQ's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWK vs. XMHQ - Dividend Comparison

RWK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, more than XMHQ's 0.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF	1.00%	1.25%	1.11%	1.05%	1.18%	0.85%	0.96%	1.09%	1.22%	0.99%	1.30%	0.92%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	0.56%	0.64%	5.20%	0.73%	1.72%	1.00%	1.12%	1.22%	1.59%	1.06%	1.63%	1.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWK and XMHQ in my portfolio?

RWK and XMHQ have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RWK or XMHQ?

RWK has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to XMHQ (3.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWK dropped -56.49% vs XMHQ's -58.19%.

Which ETF is better, RWK or XMHQ?

On 10-year performance, RWK leads with 13.00% vs 12.83% for XMHQ. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XMHQ has been the lower-risk option at 3.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWK or XMHQ?

Over the 10-year period, RWK has performed better with a 13.00% return vs 12.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWK or XMHQ?

XMHQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWK or XMHQ?

RWK has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.56% for XMHQ.

What is the main difference between RWK and XMHQ?

RWK is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while XMHQ is Quality Factor. RWK tracks S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index, while XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWK and 0.25% for XMHQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs 0.95), 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.