XMHQ vs. QVMS
XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) and QVMS (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index, while QVMS is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XMHQ returned 16.56%/yr vs 14.97%/yr for QVMS. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XMHQ charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QVMS.
Performance
XMHQ vs. QVMS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 9.49% return, which is significantly lower than QVMS's 15.96% return.
XMHQ
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- 4.20%
- YTD
- 9.49%
- 6M
- 9.51%
- 1Y
- 14.33%
- 3Y*
- 16.56%
- 5Y*
- 9.37%
- 10Y*
- 12.83%
QVMS
- 1D
- -0.75%
- 1M
- 2.44%
- YTD
- 15.96%
- 6M
- 14.49%
- 1Y
- 31.77%
- 3Y*
- 14.97%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XMHQ vs. QVMS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 9.49% | 4.71% | 16.79% | 29.51% | -12.42% | 4.40% |
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 15.96% | 5.56% | 9.50% | 16.89% | -14.61% | 4.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMHQ and QVMS is 0.87, 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021 | 0.91 |
The correlation between XMHQ and QVMS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
XMHQ vs. QVMS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMHQ
QVMS
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Industrials
XMHQ
QVMS
Healthcare
XMHQ
QVMS
Financial Services
XMHQ
QVMS
Technology
XMHQ
QVMS
Consumer Cyclical
XMHQ
QVMS
Energy
XMHQ
QVMS
Basic Materials
XMHQ
QVMS
Consumer Defensive
XMHQ
QVMS
Communication Services
XMHQ
QVMS
Utilities
XMHQ
QVMS
Real Estate
XMHQ
-
QVMS
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. QVMS — Risk / Return Rank
XMHQ
QVMS
XMHQ vs. QVMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS). 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 | QVMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.31 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.63 | 3.63 | -2.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.76 | 12.26 | -7.49 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XMHQ | QVMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.93 | 1.82 | -0.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.45 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.62 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 0.33 | +0.12 |
Drawdowns
XMHQ vs. QVMS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than QVMS's maximum drawdown of -28.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and QVMS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMHQ | QVMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.19% | -28.05% | -30.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.85% | -8.78% | -0.07% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.56% | -28.05% | +3.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.47% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.75% | +0.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.29% | -9.10% | -0.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.02% | 2.60% | +0.42% |
Volatility
XMHQ vs. QVMS - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) have volatilities of 4.67% and 4.76%, 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
| XMHQ | QVMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.67% | 4.76% | -0.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.09% | 12.05% | -0.96% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.47% | 17.62% | -2.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.74% | 21.25% | -0.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.71% | 21.25% | -0.54% |
XMHQ vs. QVMS - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than QVMS's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
XMHQ vs. QVMS - Dividend Comparison
XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%, less than QVMS's 1.13% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QVMS Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 1.13% | 1.10% | 1.53% | 1.51% | 1.58% | 0.64% | 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 QVMS have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QVMS has higher volatility (4.76%) compared to XMHQ (4.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs QVMS's -28.05%.
On 3-year performance, XMHQ leads with 16.56% vs 14.97% for QVMS. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 16.56% return vs 14.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QVMS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMHQ.
QVMS has the higher dividend yield at 1.13%, compared with 0.55% for XMHQ.
XMHQ is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while QVMS is Multi-factor. XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index, while QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.15% for QVMS.
QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 0.93), 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 QVMS
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