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

Performance

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with XMHQ having a 7.58% return and FDVV slightly higher at 7.59%.


XMHQ

1D
-0.34%
1M
0.12%
YTD
7.58%
6M
8.05%
1Y
12.57%
3Y*
15.37%
5Y*
9.12%
10Y*
12.56%

FDVV

1D
-0.21%
1M
1.68%
YTD
7.59%
6M
7.85%
1Y
22.32%
3Y*
19.56%
5Y*
13.25%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMHQ
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF
7.58%4.71%16.79%29.51%-12.42%20.98%26.61%27.18%-9.08%15.64%
FDVV
Fidelity High Dividend ETF
7.59%17.08%21.81%18.00%-4.21%29.24%2.80%24.07%-1.26%14.00%

Correlation

The correlation between XMHQ and FDVV is 0.70, 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

0.70

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

0.78

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

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2016

0.79

The correlation between XMHQ and FDVV shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.83 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XMHQ
FDVV

Industrials

25.8%
3.4%

Healthcare

19.7%
3.1%

Financial Services

15.1%
17.0%

Technology

12.1%
29.1%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
13.6%

Energy

6.7%

-

Basic Materials

4.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
11.0%

Communication Services

2.7%
3.7%

Utilities

2.2%
8.7%

Real Estate

-

10.1%

Industrials

XMHQ
25.8%
FDVV
3.4%

Healthcare

XMHQ
19.7%
FDVV
3.1%

Financial Services

XMHQ
15.1%
FDVV
17.0%

Technology

XMHQ
12.1%
FDVV
29.1%

Consumer Cyclical

XMHQ
9.7%
FDVV
13.6%

Energy

XMHQ
6.7%
FDVV

-

Basic Materials

XMHQ
4.8%
FDVV

-

Consumer Defensive

XMHQ
3.9%
FDVV
11.0%

Communication Services

XMHQ
2.7%
FDVV
3.7%

Utilities

XMHQ
2.2%
FDVV
8.7%

Real Estate

XMHQ

-

FDVV
10.1%

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. FDVV — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMHQ
XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

FDVV
FDVV Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
FDVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDVV Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
FDVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDVV Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV). 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.


XMHQFDVVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.41

-0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.43

2.41

-0.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.17

10.00

-5.83

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMHQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the FDVV Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMHQ and FDVV, 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


XMHQFDVVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.81

2.23

-1.42

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

0.90

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

0.79

-0.34

Drawdowns

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than FDVV's maximum drawdown of -40.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and FDVV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMHQFDVVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.19%

-40.25%

-17.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.85%

-9.30%

+0.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.56%

-15.90%

-8.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.47%

-20.18%

-5.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.90%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.44%

-1.85%

-0.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.28%

-3.80%

-5.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.02%

2.24%

+0.78%

Volatility

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) has a higher volatility of 4.06% compared to Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV) at 2.96%. This indicates that XMHQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FDVV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMHQFDVVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.06%

2.96%

+1.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.28%

8.08%

+3.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.61%

10.07%

+5.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.76%

14.75%

+6.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.72%

16.99%

+3.73%

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than FDVV's 0.29% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMHQ vs. FDVV - Dividend Comparison

XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%, less than FDVV's 2.74% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FDVV
Fidelity High Dividend ETF
2.74%2.89%2.94%3.77%3.44%2.70%3.19%3.93%4.05%3.66%1.04%0.00%
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 FDVV have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XMHQ has higher volatility (4.06%) compared to FDVV (2.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs FDVV's -40.25%.

On 5-year performance, FDVV leads with 13.25% vs 9.12% for XMHQ. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FDVV has been the lower-risk option at 2.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FDVV has performed better with a 13.25% return vs 9.12%. 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 0.29% for FDVV.

FDVV has the higher dividend yield at 2.74%, compared with 0.56% for XMHQ.

XMHQ is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while FDVV is Large Cap Blend Equities. XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index, while FDVV tracks Fidelity Core Dividend Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.29% for FDVV.

FDVV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 0.81), 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 FDVV

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