PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMH.TO vs. XMHQ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMH.TO (iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMH.TO is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400® CAD Hedged Index, while XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMH.TO returned 9.24%/yr vs 13.65%/yr for XMHQ. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMH.TO charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMHQ.

Performance

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XMH.TO is traded in CAD, while XMHQ is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XMHQ values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMH.TO achieves a 12.86% return, which is significantly higher than XMHQ's 10.89% return. Over the past 10 years, XMH.TO has underperformed XMHQ with an annualized return of 9.24%, while XMHQ has yielded a comparatively higher 13.65% annualized return.

XMH.TO

1D
-0.06%
1M
3.81%
YTD
12.86%
6M
12.86%
1Y
22.40%
3Y*
13.91%
5Y*
6.09%
10Y*
9.24%

XMHQ

1D
0.92%
1M
6.28%
YTD
10.89%
6M
9.09%
1Y
15.81%
3Y*
17.91%
5Y*
12.50%
10Y*
13.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMH.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		12.86%5.45%12.05%15.06%-14.93%21.83%10.06%24.77%-13.79%15.70%
XMHQ
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF		10.89%-0.10%26.83%26.66%-6.18%19.89%24.47%20.93%-1.37%8.27%

Correlation

The correlation between XMH.TO 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

0.84

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

0.83

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

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 12, 2015

0.72

The correlation between XMH.TO and XMHQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (all time) to 0.84 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMH.TO
XMHQ

Industrials

25.6%
25.8%

Technology

17.1%
12.1%

Financial Services

13.8%
15.1%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
9.7%

Healthcare

8.9%
19.7%

Real Estate

7.5%

-

Energy

5.2%
6.7%

Basic Materials

5.0%
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
3.9%

Utilities

3.0%
2.2%

Communication Services

1.0%
2.7%

Industrials

XMH.TO
25.6%
XMHQ
25.8%

Technology

XMH.TO
17.1%
XMHQ
12.1%

Financial Services

XMH.TO
13.8%
XMHQ
15.1%

Consumer Cyclical

XMH.TO
9.7%
XMHQ
9.7%

Healthcare

XMH.TO
8.9%
XMHQ
19.7%

Real Estate

XMH.TO
7.5%
XMHQ

-

Energy

XMH.TO
5.2%
XMHQ
6.7%

Basic Materials

XMH.TO
5.0%
XMHQ
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

XMH.TO
4.1%
XMHQ
3.9%

Utilities

XMH.TO
3.0%
XMHQ
2.2%

Communication Services

XMH.TO
1.0%
XMHQ
2.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF

Often compared with XMH.TO:
XMH.TO vs. VOTXMH.TO vs. VFV.TOXMH.TO vs. XEF.TOXMH.TO vs. USMVXMH.TO vs. XMD.TOXMH.TO vs. XSU.TOXMH.TO vs. CCO.TO
Often compared with XMHQ:
XMHQ vs. XMMOXMHQ vs. IMCGXMHQ vs. RFVXMHQ vs. MDYXMHQ vs. GRPMXMHQ vs. RWKXMHQ vs. FLQM

Return for Risk

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMH.TO
XMH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
XMH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
XMHQ
XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
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.

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) 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.

XMH.TOXMHQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.42
1.04

+0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.12
1.62

+0.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.18

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.44

1.71

+0.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.87

5.09

+3.77

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

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMH.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is higher than the XMHQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMH.TO 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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XMH.TOXMHQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.42

1.04

+0.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.68

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

0.73

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.87

-0.45

Drawdowns

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMH.TO drawdown since its inception was -44.82%, which is greater than XMHQ's maximum drawdown of -30.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMH.TO and XMHQ.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMH.TOXMHQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.82%

-30.85%

-13.97%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.24%

-9.26%

+0.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.81%

-23.20%

-1.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.86%

-23.20%

-2.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.82%

-30.85%

-13.97%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.06%

0.00%

-0.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.04%

-3.98%

-3.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.53%

3.12%

-0.59%

Volatility

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) is 4.16%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) has a volatility of 4.62%. This indicates that XMH.TO 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMH.TOXMHQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.16%

4.62%

-0.46%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.57%

11.24%

+0.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.94%

15.35%

+0.59%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.65%

18.61%

+1.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.96%

18.88%

+2.08%

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMH.TO has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than XMHQ's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XMH.TO vs. XMHQ - Dividend Comparison

XMH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, more than XMHQ's 0.55% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XMH.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.98%1.10%1.03%1.16%1.30%0.91%1.02%1.35%1.39%0.88%1.52%0.63%
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

XMH.TO 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.

On fees, XMH.TO is cheaper at 0.16% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMH.TO is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMHQ.

XMH.TO is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while XMHQ is Mid Cap Blend Equities. XMH.TO tracks S&P MidCap 400® CAD Hedged Index, while XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XMH.TO and 0.25% for XMHQ.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMH.TO and XMHQ

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