UPGD vs. XMHQ

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

UPGD (Invesco Bloomberg Analyst Rating Improvers ETF) and XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds from Invesco - UPGD tracks the Bloomberg ANR Improvers Index - Benchmark TR Gross while XMHQ tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UPGD returned 10.20%/yr vs 12.75%/yr for XMHQ. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. UPGD charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMHQ.

Performance

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Bloomberg Analyst Rating Improvers ETF (UPGD) 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, UPGD achieves a 11.28% return, which is significantly higher than XMHQ's 10.27% return. Over the past 10 years, UPGD has underperformed XMHQ with an annualized return of 10.20%, while XMHQ has yielded a comparatively higher 12.75% annualized return.

UPGD

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 6.09%
• YTD: 11.28%
• 6M: 11.94%
• 1Y: 18.15%
• 3Y*: 15.88%
• 5Y*: 7.21%
• 10Y*: 10.20%

XMHQ

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 2.77%
• YTD: 10.27%
• 6M: 9.61%
• 1Y: 15.31%
• 3Y*: 17.32%
• 5Y*: 9.53%
• 10Y*: 12.75%

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

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UPGD Invesco Bloomberg Analyst Rating Improvers ETF	11.28%	8.89%	13.28%	15.65%	-13.17%	24.09%	6.21%	32.02%	-14.84%	13.31%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	10.27%	4.71%	16.79%	29.51%	-12.42%	20.98%	26.61%	27.18%	-9.08%	15.64%

Correlation

The correlation between UPGD and XMHQ is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2006	0.81

The correlation between UPGD and XMHQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UPGD	XMHQ
Industrials	32.2%	25.8%
Technology	22.5%	12.1%
Consumer Cyclical	19.2%	9.7%
Consumer Defensive	14.0%	3.9%
Utilities	6.3%	2.2%
Healthcare	5.9%	19.7%
Communication Services	2.2%	2.7%
Financial Services	0.0%	15.1%
Basic Materials	-	4.8%
Energy	-	6.7%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

UPGD vs. XMHQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

UPGD

UPGD Risk / Return Rank: 38
UPGD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
UPGD Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
UPGD Omega Ratio Rank: 35
UPGD Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
UPGD Martin Ratio Rank: 40

XMHQ

XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 31
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 27
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Bloomberg Analyst Rating Improvers ETF (UPGD) 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.

	UPGD	XMHQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.34	1.00	+0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	1.56	+0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.18	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.82	1.74	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.24	5.09	+1.15
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UPGD Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is higher than the XMHQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UPGD 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UPGD	XMHQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.34	1.00	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.39	0.46	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.47	0.62	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.45	-0.11

Drawdowns

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UPGD drawdown since its inception was -60.74%, roughly equal to the maximum XMHQ drawdown of -58.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UPGD and XMHQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	UPGD	XMHQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.74%	-58.19%	-2.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-8.85%	-1.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.90%	-24.56%	+7.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.31%	-25.47%	+1.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-50.20%	-36.90%	-13.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.26%	-9.29%	-0.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.92%	3.02%	-0.10%

Volatility

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Bloomberg Analyst Rating Improvers ETF (UPGD) is 4.00%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) has a volatility of 4.27%. This indicates that UPGD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMHQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UPGD	XMHQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.00%	4.27%	-0.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.96%	11.10%	-1.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.61%	15.43%	-1.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.65%	20.74%	-2.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.64%	20.70%	+0.94%

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

UPGD has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than XMHQ's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

UPGD vs. XMHQ - Dividend Comparison

UPGD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.57%, more than XMHQ's 0.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
UPGD Invesco Bloomberg Analyst Rating Improvers ETF	1.57%	1.75%	1.28%	1.39%	0.72%	0.52%	0.28%	0.20%	1.43%	0.00%	1.55%	0.93%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	0.55%	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 UPGD and XMHQ in my portfolio?

UPGD and XMHQ 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.

Which is riskier, UPGD or XMHQ?

XMHQ has higher volatility (4.27%) compared to UPGD (4.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UPGD dropped -60.74% vs XMHQ's -58.19%.

Which ETF is better, UPGD or XMHQ?

On 10-year performance, XMHQ leads with 12.75% vs 10.20% for UPGD. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, UPGD has been the lower-risk option at 4.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UPGD or XMHQ?

Over the 10-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 12.75% return vs 10.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UPGD or XMHQ?

XMHQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for UPGD.

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

UPGD has the higher dividend yield at 1.57%, compared with 0.55% for XMHQ.

What is the main difference between UPGD and XMHQ?

UPGD tracks Bloomberg ANR Improvers Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for UPGD and 0.25% for XMHQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UPGD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 vs 1.00), 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.