XMHQ vs. RBIL
XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XMHQ returned 14.01% vs 4.20% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.17, they often move in opposite directions. XMHQ charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.
Performance
XMHQ vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 10.37% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.66% return.
XMHQ
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 1.42%
- 6M
- 5.24%
- YTD
- 10.37%
- 1Y
- 14.01%
- 3Y*
- 13.50%
- 5Y*
- 10.14%
- 10Y*
- 12.59%
RBIL
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.08%
- 6M
- 2.48%
- YTD
- 2.66%
- 1Y
- 4.20%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XMHQ vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 10.37% | 7.40% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 2.66% | 2.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMHQ and RBIL is -0.16, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025 | -0.17 |
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. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank
XMHQ
RBIL
XMHQ vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). 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 | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.64 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -5.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 2.20 | -1.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.59 | 7.57 | -5.98 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.64 | 32.59 | -27.95 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XMHQ vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and RBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMHQ | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.19% | -0.56% | -57.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.85% | -0.56% | -8.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.56% | — | — |
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 | -1.71% | -0.17% | -1.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.24% | -0.08% | -9.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.03% | 0.13% | +2.90% |
Volatility
XMHQ vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) has a higher volatility of 3.78% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.33%. This indicates that XMHQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMHQ | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.78% | 0.33% | +3.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.31% | 0.86% | +10.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.73% | 0.94% | +14.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.67% | 1.06% | +19.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.63% | 1.06% | +19.57% |
XMHQ vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% 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. RBIL - Dividend Comparison
XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than RBIL's 4.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 4.37% | 3.65% | 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 | 0.58% | 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 RBIL have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XMHQ has higher volatility (3.78%) compared to RBIL (0.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs RBIL's -0.56%.
On 1-year performance, XMHQ leads with 14.01% vs 4.20% for RBIL. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 14.01% return vs 4.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMHQ.
RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.37%, compared with 0.58% for XMHQ.
XMHQ is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.17% for RBIL.
RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.54 vs 0.90), 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 RBIL
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