PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XLFQ.L vs. SPMO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XLFQ.L (Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF) and SPMO (Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLFQ.L is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while SPMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P 500 Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLFQ.L returned 13.02%/yr vs 21.67%/yr for SPMO. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XLFQ.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for SPMO.

Performance

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) and Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF (SPMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XLFQ.L is traded in GBp, while SPMO is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the SPMO values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLFQ.L achieves a -4.71% return, which is significantly lower than SPMO's 28.97% return. Over the past 10 years, XLFQ.L has underperformed SPMO with an annualized return of 13.02%, while SPMO has yielded a comparatively higher 21.67% annualized return.

XLFQ.L

1D
3.26%
1M
2.31%
YTD
-4.71%
6M
-2.62%
1Y
4.63%
3Y*
15.45%
5Y*
9.10%
10Y*
13.02%

SPMO

1D
-1.46%
1M
11.86%
YTD
28.97%
6M
26.62%
1Y
45.32%
3Y*
38.70%
5Y*
25.26%
10Y*
21.67%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XLFQ.L
Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF		-4.71%7.07%32.15%6.12%-0.39%37.90%-6.56%27.16%-9.51%11.87%
SPMO
Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF		28.97%17.56%48.36%11.68%0.20%23.81%24.49%21.14%4.96%16.71%

Correlation

The correlation between XLFQ.L and SPMO is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.27

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

0.25

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

0.32

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

0.33

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2015

0.33

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XLFQ.L
SPMO

Financial Services

98.0%
5.9%

Technology

1.7%
52.6%

Industrials

0.2%
11.3%

Basic Materials

-

1.6%

Communication Services

-

9.2%

Consumer Cyclical

-

1.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.3%

Energy

-

3.4%

Healthcare

-

6.7%

Real Estate

-

1.0%

Utilities

-

2.8%

Financial Services

XLFQ.L
98.0%
SPMO
5.9%

Technology

XLFQ.L
1.7%
SPMO
52.6%

Industrials

XLFQ.L
0.2%
SPMO
11.3%

Basic Materials

XLFQ.L

-

SPMO
1.6%

Communication Services

XLFQ.L

-

SPMO
9.2%

Consumer Cyclical

XLFQ.L

-

SPMO
1.3%

Consumer Defensive

XLFQ.L

-

SPMO
4.3%

Energy

XLFQ.L

-

SPMO
3.4%

Healthcare

XLFQ.L

-

SPMO
6.7%

Real Estate

XLFQ.L

-

SPMO
1.0%

Utilities

XLFQ.L

-

SPMO
2.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF

Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF

Often compared with XLFQ.L:
XLFQ.L vs. XLFXLFQ.L vs. XDWF.DEXLFQ.L vs. UIFS.LXLFQ.L vs. SEIVXLFQ.L vs. FINW.LXLFQ.L vs. XWFS.LXLFQ.L vs. VOO
Often compared with SPMO:
SPMO vs. VOOSPMO vs. QQQSPMO vs. SCHGSPMO vs. MTUMSPMO vs. VUGSPMO vs. VFMOSPMO vs. XMMO

Return for Risk

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XLFQ.L
XLFQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
XLFQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank
SPMO
SPMO Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
SPMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPMO Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
SPMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPMO Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) and Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF (SPMO). 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.

XLFQ.LSPMODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.33
2.68

-2.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.57
3.48

-2.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.47

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.36

3.61

-3.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.84

11.17

-10.33

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLFQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is lower than the SPMO Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLFQ.L and SPMO, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XLFQ.LSPMODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.33

2.68

-2.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

1.36

-0.84

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.65

1.04

-0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.64

1.05

-0.41

Drawdowns

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLFQ.L drawdown since its inception was -35.39%, which is greater than SPMO's maximum drawdown of -25.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLFQ.L and SPMO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XLFQ.LSPMODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.39%

-25.97%

-9.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.81%

-12.62%

-0.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.01%

-23.01%

+4.00%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.01%

-23.01%

+4.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.39%

-25.97%

-9.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.62%

-1.46%

-5.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.65%

-4.14%

-1.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.48%

4.07%

+1.41%

Volatility

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) is 4.46%, while Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF (SPMO) has a volatility of 6.92%. This indicates that XLFQ.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XLFQ.LSPMODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.46%

6.92%

-2.46%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.48%

13.27%

-2.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.91%

16.99%

-3.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.52%

18.63%

-1.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.14%

20.82%

-0.68%

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLFQ.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is higher than SPMO's 0.13% 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

XLFQ.L vs. SPMO - Dividend Comparison

XLFQ.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SPMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
SPMO
Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF		0.66%0.73%0.48%1.63%1.66%0.52%1.27%1.39%1.05%0.77%1.94%0.36%
XLFQ.L
Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

XLFQ.L and SPMO have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, SPMO is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SPMO is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.14% for XLFQ.L.

XLFQ.L is categorized as Financials Equities, while SPMO is Momentum. XLFQ.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while SPMO tracks S&P 500 Momentum Index. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLFQ.L and 0.13% for SPMO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XLFQ.L and SPMO

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