XMHQ vs. FFLC

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) and FFLC (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index, while FFLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. XMHQ is passively managed, while FFLC is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMHQ returned 9.12%/yr vs 15.52%/yr for FFLC. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XMHQ charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FFLC.

Performance

XMHQ vs. FFLC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 7.58% return, which is significantly lower than FFLC's 8.51% return.

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%

FFLC

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: -0.24%
• YTD: 8.51%
• 6M: 9.11%
• 1Y: 23.62%
• 3Y*: 22.38%
• 5Y*: 15.52%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMHQ vs. FFLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	7.58%	4.71%	16.79%	29.51%	-12.42%	20.98%	28.16%
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	8.51%	17.67%	27.89%	25.07%	-0.04%	24.53%	18.76%

Correlation

The correlation between XMHQ and FFLC 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	0.77
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020	0.83

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

XMHQ vs. FFLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMHQ	FFLC
Industrials	25.8%	10.8%
Healthcare	19.7%	8.2%
Financial Services	15.1%	11.1%
Technology	12.1%	32.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.7%	10.4%
Energy	6.7%	4.6%
Basic Materials	4.8%	1.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	4.7%
Communication Services	2.7%	11.9%
Utilities	2.2%	2.5%
Real Estate	-	1.1%

Return for Risk

XMHQ vs. FFLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMHQ

XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 27
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 23
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 31

FFLC

FFLC Risk / Return Rank: 59
FFLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
FFLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
FFLC Omega Ratio Rank: 59
FFLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
FFLC Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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. FFLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC). 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.

	XMHQ	FFLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.81	1.81	-1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.29	2.47	-1.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.33	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.43	2.38	-0.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.17	10.72	-6.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMHQ vs. FFLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMHQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the FFLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMHQ and FFLC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMHQ	FFLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81	1.81	-1.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	0.92	-0.48
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	1.15	-0.70

Drawdowns

XMHQ vs. FFLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than FFLC's maximum drawdown of -19.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and FFLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMHQ	FFLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.19%	-19.72%	-38.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.85%	-9.98%	+1.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.56%	-19.72%	-4.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.47%	-19.72%	-5.75%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.44%	-2.38%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.28%	-2.99%	-6.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.02%	2.21%	+0.81%

Volatility

XMHQ vs. FFLC - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) have volatilities of 4.06% and 3.95%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	XMHQ	FFLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.06%	3.95%	+0.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.28%	10.15%	+1.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.61%	13.11%	+2.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.76%	16.97%	+3.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.72%	17.67%	+3.05%

XMHQ vs. FFLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than FFLC's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMHQ vs. FFLC - Dividend Comparison

XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%, less than FFLC's 1.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	1.01%	1.10%	0.82%	0.57%	1.67%	1.68%	0.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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

Can I hold both XMHQ and FFLC in my portfolio?

XMHQ and FFLC 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.

Which is riskier, XMHQ or FFLC?

XMHQ has higher volatility (4.06%) compared to FFLC (3.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs FFLC's -19.72%.

Which ETF is better, XMHQ or FFLC?

On 5-year performance, FFLC leads with 15.52% vs 9.12% for XMHQ. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FFLC has been the lower-risk option at 3.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XMHQ or FFLC?

Over the 5-year period, FFLC has performed better with a 15.52% return vs 9.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMHQ or FFLC?

XMHQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FFLC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XMHQ or FFLC?

FFLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.56% for XMHQ.

What is the main difference between XMHQ and FFLC?

XMHQ is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while FFLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.38% for FFLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 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.