XMHQ vs. GSG
XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - XMHQ is a Quality Factor fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMHQ returned 12.99%/yr vs 8.03%/yr for GSG. Their 0.28 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. XMHQ charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
XMHQ vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 15.60% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 32.52% return. Over the past 10 years, XMHQ has outperformed GSG with an annualized return of 12.99%, while GSG has yielded a comparatively lower 8.03% annualized return.
XMHQ
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- 2.95%
- 6M
- 10.39%
- YTD
- 15.60%
- 1Y
- 17.55%
- 3Y*
- 14.83%
- 5Y*
- 10.61%
- 10Y*
- 12.99%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.62%
GSG
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- 5.78%
- 6M
- 21.95%
- YTD
- 32.52%
- 1Y
- 37.47%
- 3Y*
- 12.51%
- 5Y*
- 14.20%
- 10Y*
- 8.03%
- ALL TIME*
- -2.36%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $18.96M | $16.42M | $22.87M | |
| $18.41M | $19.18M | $20.49M |
XMHQ vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 15.60% | 4.71% | 16.79% | 29.51% | -12.42% | 20.98% | 26.61% | 27.18% | -9.08% | 15.64% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 32.52% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -5.51% | 24.08% | 38.77% | -23.94% | 15.62% | -13.88% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMHQ and GSG is -0.23, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.00 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.14 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2006 | 0.28 |
The correlation between XMHQ and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to 0.28 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
XMHQ
GSG
XMHQ vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.
| XMHQ | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.34 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.27 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.99 | 2.00 | -0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.92 | 6.32 | -0.40 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XMHQ vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMHQ | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.19% | -89.62% | +31.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.85% | -18.81% | +9.96% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.56% | -18.81% | -5.75% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.47% | -29.12% | +3.65% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.90% | -57.64% | +20.74% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.38% | -59.99% | +59.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.21% | -63.67% | +54.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.97% | 5.94% | -2.97% |
Volatility
XMHQ vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) is 3.47%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 8.99%. This indicates that XMHQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMHQ | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.47% | 8.99% | -5.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.17% | 21.89% | -10.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.24% | 24.44% | -9.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.59% | 22.90% | -2.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.64% | 22.08% | -1.44% |
XMHQ vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMHQ vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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
XMHQ and GSG have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (8.99%) compared to XMHQ (3.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 10-year performance, XMHQ leads with 12.99% vs 8.03% for GSG. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XMHQ has been the lower-risk option at 3.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 12.99% return vs 8.03%. 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 0.75% for GSG.
XMHQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.55%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
XMHQ is categorized as Quality Factor, while GSG is Commodities. XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.75% for GSG.
GSG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.54 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.
Find the right allocation for XMHQ and GSG
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