XLF vs. FDIQ
XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) and FDIQ (Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF) are both Financials Equities funds - XLF tracks the Financial Select Sector Index while FDIQ tracks the Bloomberg Financial Data Providers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLF returned 12.38%/yr vs 7.60%/yr for FDIQ. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XLF charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for FDIQ.
Performance
XLF vs. FDIQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLF achieves a -6.64% return, which is significantly lower than FDIQ's 9.72% return. Over the past 10 years, XLF has outperformed FDIQ with an annualized return of 12.38%, while FDIQ has yielded a comparatively lower 7.60% annualized return.
XLF
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- -1.38%
- YTD
- -6.64%
- 6M
- -4.18%
- 1Y
- 1.13%
- 3Y*
- 17.64%
- 5Y*
- 7.61%
- 10Y*
- 12.38%
FDIQ
- 1D
- -0.97%
- 1M
- -5.53%
- YTD
- 9.72%
- 6M
- 10.28%
- 1Y
- 22.98%
- 3Y*
- 18.27%
- 5Y*
- 3.82%
- 10Y*
- 7.60%
XLF vs. FDIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF | -6.64% | 14.90% | 30.56% | 12.03% | -10.59% | 34.80% | -1.74% | 31.88% | -13.06% | 22.00% |
FDIQ Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF | 9.72% | 6.32% | 12.76% | -0.84% | -7.23% | 36.05% | -8.95% | 23.57% | -18.31% | 1.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLF and FDIQ is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 2, 2011 | 0.77 |
The correlation between XLF and FDIQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.79 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XLF vs. FDIQ — Risk / Return Rank
XLF
FDIQ
XLF vs. FDIQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF (FDIQ). 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.
| XLF | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 1.20 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.08 | 2.07 | -2.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.20 | 5.26 | -5.06 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XLF | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.08 | 1.04 | -0.97 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 | 0.13 | +0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 | 0.24 | +0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.20 | 0.37 | -0.17 |
Drawdowns
XLF vs. FDIQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLF drawdown since its inception was -82.69%, which is greater than FDIQ's maximum drawdown of -52.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLF and FDIQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLF | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -82.69% | -52.86% | -29.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.79% | -11.13% | -3.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.54% | -28.09% | +12.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.81% | -42.99% | +17.18% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.86% | -52.86% | +10.00% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.34% | -8.53% | -0.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.03% | -11.56% | -8.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.66% | 4.38% | +1.28% |
Volatility
XLF vs. FDIQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is 3.29%, while Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF (FDIQ) has a volatility of 4.06%. This indicates that XLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FDIQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XLF | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.29% | 4.06% | -0.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.94% | 13.93% | -2.99% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.41% | 22.14% | -7.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.63% | 28.70% | -10.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.16% | 31.12% | -8.96% |
XLF vs. FDIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FDIQ's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
XLF vs. FDIQ - Dividend Comparison
XLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.56%, less than FDIQ's 2.56% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIQ Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF | 2.56% | 2.66% | 2.69% | 2.89% | 2.51% | 2.04% | 2.92% | 2.44% | 2.45% | 1.59% | 1.50% | 1.92% |
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF | 1.56% | 1.31% | 1.42% | 1.71% | 2.04% | 1.63% | 2.03% | 1.87% | 2.08% | 1.48% | 21.10% | 1.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XLF and FDIQ have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FDIQ has higher volatility (4.06%) compared to XLF (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLF dropped -82.69% vs FDIQ's -52.86%.
On 10-year performance, XLF leads with 12.38% vs 7.60% for FDIQ. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF 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, XLF has performed better with a 12.38% return vs 7.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for FDIQ.
FDIQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.56%, compared with 1.56% for XLF.
XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index, while FDIQ tracks Bloomberg Financial Data Providers Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XLF and 0.35% for FDIQ.
FDIQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.04 vs 0.08), 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.
Find the right allocation for XLF and FDIQ
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