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

Performance

XMHQ vs. RSP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 8.86% return, which is significantly lower than RSP's 11.44% return. Over the past 10 years, XMHQ has outperformed RSP with an annualized return of 13.41%, while RSP has yielded a comparatively lower 12.68% annualized return.


XMHQ

1D
0.40%
1M
1.28%
YTD
8.86%
6M
6.41%
1Y
15.81%
3Y*
15.19%
5Y*
9.31%
10Y*
13.41%

RSP

1D
0.65%
1M
2.37%
YTD
11.44%
6M
10.16%
1Y
20.34%
3Y*
15.16%
5Y*
8.77%
10Y*
12.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMHQ vs. RSP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMHQ
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF
8.86%4.71%16.79%29.51%-12.42%20.98%26.61%27.18%-9.08%15.64%
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
11.44%11.21%12.79%13.70%-11.62%29.41%12.66%28.91%-7.84%18.52%

Correlation

The correlation between XMHQ and RSP is 0.88, 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

0.88

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

0.89

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

0.91

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2006

0.83

The correlation between XMHQ and RSP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMHQ vs. RSP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XMHQ
RSP

Industrials

25.9%
14.2%

Healthcare

20.4%
11.1%

Financial Services

14.3%
13.9%

Technology

13.5%
20.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%
10.0%

Energy

5.9%
4.0%

Basic Materials

5.0%
3.9%

Consumer Defensive

3.4%
6.4%

Communication Services

2.7%
3.9%

Utilities

2.2%
5.7%

Real Estate

-

6.1%

Industrials

XMHQ
25.9%
RSP
14.2%

Healthcare

XMHQ
20.4%
RSP
11.1%

Financial Services

XMHQ
14.3%
RSP
13.9%

Technology

XMHQ
13.5%
RSP
20.9%

Consumer Cyclical

XMHQ
9.4%
RSP
10.0%

Energy

XMHQ
5.9%
RSP
4.0%

Basic Materials

XMHQ
5.0%
RSP
3.9%

Consumer Defensive

XMHQ
3.4%
RSP
6.4%

Communication Services

XMHQ
2.7%
RSP
3.9%

Utilities

XMHQ
2.2%
RSP
5.7%

Real Estate

XMHQ

-

RSP
6.1%

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. RSP — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMHQ
XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank

RSP
RSP Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
RSP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSP Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSP Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
RSP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSP Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
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. RSP - 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 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP). 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.


XMHQRSPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.73

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.94

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.30

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.79

2.60

-0.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.23

9.83

-4.59

XMHQ vs. RSP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMHQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is lower than the RSP Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMHQ and RSP, 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...

Drawdowns

XMHQ vs. RSP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, roughly equal to the maximum RSP drawdown of -59.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and RSP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMHQRSPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.19%

-59.92%

+1.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.85%

-7.85%

-1.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.56%

-17.81%

-6.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.47%

-21.38%

-4.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.90%

-39.04%

+2.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.27%

-0.15%

-1.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.26%

-6.64%

-2.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.03%

2.07%

+0.96%

Volatility

XMHQ vs. RSP - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) has a higher volatility of 4.31% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) at 3.60%. This indicates that XMHQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMHQRSPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.31%

3.60%

+0.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.44%

8.69%

+2.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.74%

11.79%

+3.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.73%

16.20%

+4.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.68%

18.32%

+2.36%

XMHQ vs. RSP - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than RSP's 0.20% 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. RSP - Dividend Comparison

XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than RSP's 1.51% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
1.51%1.64%1.52%1.64%1.82%1.28%1.64%1.69%2.02%1.52%1.20%1.70%
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 RSP have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XMHQ has higher volatility (4.31%) compared to RSP (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs RSP's -59.92%.

On 10-year performance, XMHQ leads with 13.41% vs 12.68% for RSP. On fees, RSP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, RSP has been the lower-risk option at 3.60%. 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 13.41% return vs 12.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RSP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMHQ.

RSP has the higher dividend yield at 1.51%, compared with 0.58% for XMHQ.

XMHQ is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while RSP is S&P 500. XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while RSP tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.20% for RSP.

RSP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.01), 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 RSP

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