WOMN vs. XLG

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

WOMN (Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - WOMN is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Women’s Empowerment Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, WOMN returned 8.10%/yr vs 14.84%/yr for XLG. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. WOMN charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

WOMN vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WOMN achieves a 2.30% return, which is significantly lower than XLG's 3.55% return.

WOMN

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -1.26%
• YTD: 2.30%
• 6M: 1.80%
• 1Y: 10.76%
• 3Y*: 13.39%
• 5Y*: 8.10%
• 10Y*: —

XLG

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: -3.59%
• YTD: 3.55%
• 6M: 3.44%
• 1Y: 23.61%
• 3Y*: 22.12%
• 5Y*: 14.84%
• 10Y*: 17.16%

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

WOMN vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
WOMN Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF	2.30%	8.62%	16.95%	28.19%	-20.61%	24.89%	34.16%	32.50%	-12.07%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	3.55%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	30.77%	24.15%	32.04%	-12.53%

Correlation

The correlation between WOMN and XLG 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	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2018	0.83

The correlation between WOMN and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (1 year) to 0.85 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

WOMN vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WOMN	XLG
Technology	32.2%	46.8%
Financial Services	14.2%	9.0%
Healthcare	11.0%	7.0%
Communication Services	9.4%	16.0%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	11.2%
Industrials	7.3%	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	5.2%
Energy	5.6%	2.4%
Real Estate	2.0%	-
Utilities	1.8%	-
Basic Materials	1.8%	0.6%

Return for Risk

WOMN vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

WOMN

WOMN Risk / Return Rank: 29
WOMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
WOMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
WOMN Omega Ratio Rank: 26
WOMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
WOMN Martin Ratio Rank: 35

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 47
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 50
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

WOMN vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.

	WOMN	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.99	1.71	-0.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.46	2.33	-0.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.31	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.39	1.91	-0.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.04	6.89	-1.85

WOMN vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WOMN Sharpe Ratio is 0.99, which is lower than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WOMN and XLG, 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

WOMN vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WOMN drawdown since its inception was -32.23%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WOMN and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	WOMN	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.23%	-52.39%	+20.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.80%	-12.41%	+4.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.34%	-20.70%	+3.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.80%	-28.02%	+2.22%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.48%	-5.13%	+2.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.51%	-7.63%	+2.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.14%	3.44%	-1.30%

Volatility

WOMN vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) is 3.22%, while Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) has a volatility of 4.74%. This indicates that WOMN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WOMN	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.22%	4.74%	-1.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.02%	10.60%	-2.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.91%	13.86%	-2.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.19%	18.77%	-2.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.66%	18.89%	-0.23%

WOMN vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

WOMN has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

WOMN vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

WOMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, less than XLG's 0.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
WOMN Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF	0.80%	0.76%	1.08%	1.80%	5.59%	3.10%	6.15%	1.12%	0.90%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.82%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WOMN and XLG in my portfolio?

WOMN and XLG 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.

Which is riskier, WOMN or XLG?

XLG has higher volatility (4.74%) compared to WOMN (3.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WOMN dropped -32.23% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, WOMN or XLG?

On 5-year performance, XLG leads with 14.84% vs 8.10% for WOMN. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, WOMN has been the lower-risk option at 3.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WOMN or XLG?

Over the 5-year period, XLG has performed better with a 14.84% return vs 8.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WOMN or XLG?

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for WOMN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WOMN or XLG?

XLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.82%, compared with 0.80% for WOMN.

What is the main difference between WOMN and XLG?

WOMN is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. WOMN tracks Morningstar Women’s Empowerment Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Impact Shares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for WOMN and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 0.99), 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.