PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XLF vs. SPYM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XLF vs. SPYM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF (SPYM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLF achieves a -0.77% return, which is significantly lower than SPYM's 8.21% return. Over the past 10 years, XLF has underperformed SPYM with an annualized return of 13.72%, while SPYM has yielded a comparatively higher 15.61% annualized return.


XLF

1D
0.34%
1M
4.10%
YTD
-0.77%
6M
-1.95%
1Y
7.67%
3Y*
19.94%
5Y*
10.00%
10Y*
13.72%

SPYM

1D
-1.44%
1M
-1.32%
YTD
8.21%
6M
7.24%
1Y
23.73%
3Y*
20.77%
5Y*
13.13%
10Y*
15.61%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLF vs. SPYM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
-0.77%14.90%30.56%12.03%-10.59%34.80%-1.74%31.88%-13.06%22.00%
SPYM
State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF
8.21%17.79%25.00%26.24%-18.09%28.78%18.49%31.99%-4.78%21.30%

Correlation

The correlation between XLF and SPYM is 0.57, 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

0.57

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.64

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.73

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 15, 2005

0.69

The correlation between XLF and SPYM shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (1 year) to 0.73 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XLF vs. SPYM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XLF
SPYM

Financial Services

98.0%
11.9%

Technology

1.8%
38.0%

Industrials

0.2%
8.0%

Basic Materials

-

1.8%

Communication Services

-

10.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

9.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.6%

Energy

-

3.1%

Healthcare

-

8.5%

Real Estate

-

1.8%

Utilities

-

2.6%

Financial Services

XLF
98.0%
SPYM
11.9%

Technology

XLF
1.8%
SPYM
38.0%

Industrials

XLF
0.2%
SPYM
8.0%

Basic Materials

XLF

-

SPYM
1.8%

Communication Services

XLF

-

SPYM
10.1%

Consumer Cyclical

XLF

-

SPYM
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

XLF

-

SPYM
4.6%

Energy

XLF

-

SPYM
3.1%

Healthcare

XLF

-

SPYM
8.5%

Real Estate

XLF

-

SPYM
1.8%

Utilities

XLF

-

SPYM
2.6%

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. SPYM — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLF
XLF Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

SPYM
SPYM Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
SPYM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPYM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPYM Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
SPYM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPYM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XLF vs. SPYM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF (SPYM). 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.


XLFSPYMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.35

-0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.52

2.68

-2.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.33

11.98

-10.65

XLF vs. SPYM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLF Sharpe Ratio is 0.53, which is lower than the SPYM Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLF and SPYM, 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

XLF vs. SPYM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLF drawdown since its inception was -82.69%, which is greater than SPYM's maximum drawdown of -54.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLF and SPYM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XLFSPYMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.69%

-54.46%

-28.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.79%

-8.90%

-5.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.54%

-18.72%

+3.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.81%

-24.48%

-1.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.86%

-33.87%

-8.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.64%

-3.14%

-0.50%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.99%

-7.14%

-12.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.79%

1.99%

+3.80%

Volatility

XLF vs. SPYM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is 4.12%, while State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF (SPYM) has a volatility of 4.83%. This indicates that XLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPYM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XLFSPYMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.12%

4.83%

-0.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.27%

9.83%

+1.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.62%

12.46%

+2.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.58%

16.90%

+1.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.11%

18.03%

+4.08%

XLF vs. SPYM - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is higher than SPYM's 0.02% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XLF vs. SPYM - Dividend Comparison

XLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, more than SPYM's 1.30% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
SPYM
State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF
1.30%1.13%1.28%1.44%1.69%1.25%1.54%1.79%2.23%1.75%1.97%1.98%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
1.50%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 SPYM have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SPYM has higher volatility (4.83%) compared to XLF (4.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLF dropped -82.69% vs SPYM's -54.46%.

On 10-year performance, SPYM leads with 15.61% vs 13.72% for XLF. On fees, SPYM is cheaper at 0.02% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SPYM has performed better with a 15.61% return vs 13.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SPYM is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.08% for XLF.

XLF has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 1.30% for SPYM.

XLF is categorized as Financials Equities, while SPYM is S&P 500. XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index, while SPYM tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XLF and 0.02% for SPYM.

SPYM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 0.53), 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 XLF and SPYM

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