PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RWK vs. XMVM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RWK vs. XMVM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

RWK (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF) and XMVM (Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWK is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index, while XMVM is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 High Momentum Value Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWK returned 13.00%/yr vs 12.44%/yr for XMVM. Their correlation of 0.89 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.39% expense ratio.

Performance

RWK vs. XMVM - 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 Value with Momentum ETF (XMVM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RWK having a 18.15% return and XMVM slightly lower at 17.44%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with RWK having a 13.00% annualized return and XMVM not far behind at 12.44%.

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%

XMVM

1D
-0.53%
1M
5.11%
6M
13.72%
YTD
17.44%
1Y
38.27%
3Y*
17.47%
5Y*
12.42%
10Y*
12.44%
ALL TIME*
9.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. 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

XMVM

Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF
$2.16M$2.04M$1.98M

RWK vs. XMVM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
XMVM
Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF		17.44%18.46%11.73%16.31%-8.21%35.15%5.68%30.38%-9.62%2.79%

Correlation

The correlation between RWK and XMVM is 0.82, 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.

0.82

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.91

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.94

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 2008

0.89

The correlation between RWK and XMVM shifts across timeframes, from 0.82 (1 year) to 0.94 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RWK vs. XMVM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
RWK
XMVM

Industrials

23.3%
11.7%

Consumer Cyclical

21.0%
14.8%

Financial Services

13.0%
37.9%

Technology

11.8%
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

11.1%
1.2%

Energy

4.9%
13.5%

Healthcare

4.7%
2.5%

Basic Materials

4.4%
0.8%

Real Estate

2.9%
4.9%

Utilities

1.6%
8.5%

Communication Services

1.4%
0.9%

Industrials

RWK
23.3%
XMVM
11.7%

Consumer Cyclical

RWK
21.0%
XMVM
14.8%

Financial Services

RWK
13.0%
XMVM
37.9%

Technology

RWK
11.8%
XMVM
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

RWK
11.1%
XMVM
1.2%

Energy

RWK
4.9%
XMVM
13.5%

Healthcare

RWK
4.7%
XMVM
2.5%

Basic Materials

RWK
4.4%
XMVM
0.8%

Real Estate

RWK
2.9%
XMVM
4.9%

Utilities

RWK
1.6%
XMVM
8.5%

Communication Services

RWK
1.4%
XMVM
0.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF

Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF

Often compared with RWK:
RWK vs. RWJRWK vs. RFVRWK vs. XMHQRWK vs. ONEYRWK vs. PRNRWK vs. PRFZRWK vs. BOSOX
Often compared with XMVM:
XMVM vs. AVUVXMVM vs. MDYXMVM vs. RFVXMVM vs. SYLDXMVM vs. MDYVXMVM vs. MDYGXMVM vs. SCHD

Return for Risk

RWK vs. XMVM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
RWK
RWK Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
RWK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWK Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWK Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
RWK Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWK Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank
XMVM
XMVM Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
XMVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMVM Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
XMVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMVM Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
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. XMVM - 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 Value with Momentum ETF (XMVM). 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.

RWKXMVMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.59
2.42

-0.83

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.41
3.49

-1.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.43

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.34

3.91

-1.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.78

12.52

-4.74

RWK vs. XMVM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWK Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is lower than the XMVM Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWK and XMVM, 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

RWK vs. XMVM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWK drawdown since its inception was -56.49%, smaller than the maximum XMVM drawdown of -62.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWK and XMVM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RWKXMVMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.49%

-62.83%

+6.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.14%

-9.18%

-1.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.58%

-24.12%

-0.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.58%

-24.12%

-0.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.20%

-45.07%

-1.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.30%

-0.71%

-0.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.49%

-10.20%

+2.71%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.35%

2.86%

+0.49%

Volatility

RWK vs. XMVM - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) has a higher volatility of 4.08% compared to Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF (XMVM) at 3.29%. This indicates that RWK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMVM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RWKXMVMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.08%

3.29%

+0.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.96%

9.25%

+2.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.49%

14.85%

+1.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.94%

21.24%

-0.30%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.88%

22.74%

+0.14%

RWK vs. XMVM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both RWK and XMVM have an expense ratio of 0.39%.

Dividends

RWK vs. XMVM - Dividend Comparison

RWK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, less than XMVM's 1.79% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XMVM
Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF		1.79%2.07%1.43%1.57%1.76%1.10%1.37%1.73%2.87%2.22%2.27%2.58%

Frequently Asked Questions

RWK and XMVM have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RWK has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to XMVM (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWK dropped -56.49% vs XMVM's -62.83%.

On 10-year performance, RWK leads with 13.00% vs 12.44% for XMVM. Both ETFs have the same 0.39% expense ratio. On volatility, XMVM has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RWK has performed better with a 13.00% return vs 12.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RWK and XMVM have the same expense ratio: 0.39% per year.

XMVM has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 1.00% for RWK.

RWK is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while XMVM is Momentum. RWK tracks S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index, while XMVM tracks S&P MidCap 400 High Momentum Value Index.

XMVM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 1.59), 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 RWK and XMVM

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