RWL vs. XMMO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RWL (Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF) and XMMO (Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWL is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index, while XMMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWL returned 13.96%/yr vs 19.73%/yr for XMMO. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RWL charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XMMO.

Performance

RWL vs. XMMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWL achieves a 11.07% return, which is significantly lower than XMMO's 23.73% return. Over the past 10 years, RWL has underperformed XMMO with an annualized return of 13.96%, while XMMO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.73% annualized return.

RWL

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: 3.13%
• YTD: 11.07%
• 6M: 11.66%
• 1Y: 26.76%
• 3Y*: 19.96%
• 5Y*: 12.89%
• 10Y*: 13.96%

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)

RWL vs. XMMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF	11.07%	18.65%	16.45%	17.43%	-6.00%	30.29%	9.14%	27.83%	-7.74%	20.34%
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 RWL and XMMO is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.79
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2008	0.79

The correlation between RWL and XMMO shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (1 year) to 0.79 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RWL vs. XMMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWL	XMMO
Healthcare	19.5%	6.3%
Financial Services	15.4%	2.4%
Technology	13.7%	16.7%
Consumer Cyclical	12.3%	4.6%
Consumer Defensive	11.1%	0.5%
Industrials	8.6%	41.1%
Communication Services	7.5%	1.6%
Energy	6.6%	7.7%
Utilities	2.4%	5.8%
Basic Materials	2.1%	7.2%
Real Estate	0.9%	6.1%

Return for Risk

RWL vs. XMMO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWL

RWL Risk / Return Rank: 81
RWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
RWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
RWL Omega Ratio Rank: 79
RWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
RWL Martin Ratio Rank: 83

XMMO

XMMO Risk / Return Rank: 67
XMMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
XMMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
XMMO Omega Ratio Rank: 55
XMMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
XMMO Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

RWL vs. XMMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) 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.

	RWL	XMMO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.69	1.99	+0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.76	2.77	+0.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.35	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.05	4.45	-0.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.12	18.21	-1.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RWL vs. XMMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWL Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is higher than the XMMO Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWL 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RWL	XMMO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.69	1.99	+0.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89	0.78	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.83	0.89	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.58	0.58	0.00

Drawdowns

RWL vs. XMMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWL drawdown since its inception was -54.83%, roughly equal to the maximum XMMO drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWL and XMMO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWL	XMMO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.83%	-55.37%	+0.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.64%	-8.34%	+1.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.39%	-24.93%	+10.54%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.49%	-27.91%	+10.42%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.04%	-36.74%	+0.70%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.57%	0.00%	-0.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.45%	-9.45%	+3.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.57%	2.04%	-0.47%

Volatility

RWL vs. XMMO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) is 2.12%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) has a volatility of 7.82%. This indicates that RWL 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.

Volatility by Period

	RWL	XMMO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.12%	7.82%	-5.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.12%	15.54%	-8.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.00%	18.71%	-8.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.50%	21.45%	-6.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.86%	22.27%	-5.41%

RWL vs. XMMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

RWL vs. XMMO - Dividend Comparison

RWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, more than XMMO's 0.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF	1.25%	1.35%	1.43%	1.60%	1.62%	1.35%	1.75%	1.87%	1.99%	1.60%	1.71%	1.97%
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

Can I hold both RWL and XMMO in my portfolio?

RWL and XMMO have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RWL or XMMO?

XMMO has higher volatility (7.82%) compared to RWL (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWL dropped -54.83% vs XMMO's -55.37%.

Which ETF is better, RWL or XMMO?

On 10-year performance, XMMO leads with 19.73% vs 13.96% for RWL. On fees, XMMO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWL or XMMO?

Over the 10-year period, XMMO has performed better with a 19.73% return vs 13.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWL or XMMO?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWL or XMMO?

RWL has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.60% for XMMO.

What is the main difference between RWL and XMMO?

RWL is categorized as S&P 500, while XMMO is Momentum. RWL tracks S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index, while XMMO tracks S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWL and 0.35% for XMMO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 1.99), 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.