PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMHQ vs. DGRW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 13.81% return, which is significantly higher than DGRW's 10.05% return. Over the past 10 years, XMHQ has underperformed DGRW with an annualized return of 12.81%, while DGRW has yielded a comparatively higher 13.79% annualized return.


XMHQ

1D
1.13%
1M
2.55%
6M
8.92%
YTD
13.81%
1Y
17.48%
3Y*
14.23%
5Y*
10.44%
10Y*
12.81%
ALL TIME*
9.54%

DGRW

1D
1.37%
1M
2.07%
6M
6.86%
YTD
10.05%
1Y
17.60%
3Y*
15.28%
5Y*
11.72%
10Y*
13.79%
ALL TIME*
13.05%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$51.74M$49.20M$56.02M
$19.09M$19.28M$20.51M

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMHQ
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF
13.81%4.71%16.79%29.51%-12.42%20.98%26.61%27.18%-9.08%15.64%
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
10.05%12.17%16.98%18.66%-6.33%24.46%13.87%29.54%-5.38%26.90%

Correlation

The correlation between XMHQ and DGRW is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.74

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.80

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.81

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2013

0.75

The correlation between XMHQ and DGRW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XMHQ
DGRW

Industrials

30.2%
11.8%

Technology

18.5%
33.8%

Healthcare

16.0%
12.8%

Financial Services

15.1%
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%
8.0%

Energy

6.9%
4.5%

Utilities

2.2%
0.2%

Basic Materials

1.5%
2.8%

Communication Services

1.4%
11.1%

Consumer Defensive

1.1%
6.7%

Real Estate

-

-

Industrials

XMHQ
30.2%
DGRW
11.8%

Technology

XMHQ
18.5%
DGRW
33.8%

Healthcare

XMHQ
16.0%
DGRW
12.8%

Financial Services

XMHQ
15.1%
DGRW
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XMHQ
9.4%
DGRW
8.0%

Energy

XMHQ
6.9%
DGRW
4.5%

Utilities

XMHQ
2.2%
DGRW
0.2%

Basic Materials

XMHQ
1.5%
DGRW
2.8%

Communication Services

XMHQ
1.4%
DGRW
11.1%

Consumer Defensive

XMHQ
1.1%
DGRW
6.7%

Real Estate

XMHQ

-

DGRW

-

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

XMHQ vs. DGRW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XMHQ
XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

DGRW
DGRW Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
DGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
DGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW). 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.


XMHQDGRWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.65

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.31

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.98

2.13

-0.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.90

8.60

-2.70

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMHQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.16, which is lower than the DGRW Sharpe Ratio of 1.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMHQ and DGRW, 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

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than DGRW's maximum drawdown of -32.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and DGRW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMHQDGRWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.19%

-32.04%

-26.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.85%

-8.30%

-0.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.56%

-16.21%

-8.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.47%

-17.27%

-8.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.90%

-32.04%

-4.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.22%

-3.00%

-6.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.97%

2.05%

+0.92%

Volatility

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW) have volatilities of 3.28% and 3.19%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMHQDGRWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.28%

3.19%

+0.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.03%

8.44%

+2.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.18%

10.47%

+4.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.58%

14.02%

+6.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.64%

16.19%

+4.45%

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than DGRW's 0.28% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMHQ vs. DGRW - Dividend Comparison

XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%, less than DGRW's 1.26% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
1.26%1.43%1.55%1.74%2.15%1.78%1.93%2.20%2.42%1.71%2.13%2.18%
XMHQ
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF
0.56%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


XMHQ and DGRW have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XMHQ has higher volatility (3.28%) compared to DGRW (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs DGRW's -32.04%.

On 10-year performance, DGRW leads with 13.79% vs 12.81% for XMHQ. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DGRW has performed better with a 13.79% return vs 12.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XMHQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for DGRW.

DGRW has the higher dividend yield at 1.26%, compared with 0.56% for XMHQ.

XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while DGRW tracks WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.28% for DGRW.

DGRW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.69 vs 1.16), 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 XMHQ and DGRW

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