PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMHQ vs. RWK
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

XMHQ vs. RWK

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK).

XMHQ and RWK are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. XMHQ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the S&P MidCap 400 Index. It was launched on Dec 1, 2006. RWK is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index. It was launched on Feb 22, 2008. Both XMHQ and RWK are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

XMHQ vs. RWK - 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 MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

XMHQ vs. RWK - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMHQ
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF		1.08%4.71%16.79%29.51%-12.42%20.98%26.61%27.18%-9.08%15.64%
RWK
Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF		1.75%10.27%11.94%23.76%-8.19%34.31%11.06%28.20%-14.65%13.39%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 1.08% return, which is significantly lower than RWK's 1.75% return. Over the past 10 years, XMHQ has outperformed RWK with an annualized return of 12.42%, while RWK has yielded a comparatively lower 11.65% annualized return.

XMHQ

1D
2.79%
1M
-4.48%
YTD
1.08%
6M
-1.19%
1Y
13.62%
3Y*
14.52%
5Y*
8.07%
10Y*
12.42%

RWK

1D
2.65%
1M
-4.67%
YTD
1.75%
6M
3.23%
1Y
20.47%
3Y*
13.66%
5Y*
9.50%
10Y*
11.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF

Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF

Often compared with XMHQ:
XMHQ vs. XMMOXMHQ vs. IMCGXMHQ vs. RFVXMHQ vs. MDYXMHQ vs. GRPMXMHQ vs. FLQMXMHQ vs. QQQ
Often compared with RWK:
RWK vs. RWJRWK vs. RFVRWK vs. XMVMRWK vs. PRNRWK vs. ONEYRWK vs. BOSOXRWK vs. PRFZ

XMHQ vs. RWK - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than RWK's 0.39% expense ratio.

RWK
Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF
XMHQ
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF

Return for Risk

XMHQ vs. RWK — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMHQ
XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
RWK
RWK Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
RWK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWK Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWK Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
RWK Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWK Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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. RWK - 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 MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK). 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.

XMHQRWKDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.68

0.94

-0.26

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.14

1.48

-0.34

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.20

-0.05

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.09

1.46

-0.37

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.97

5.14

-1.17

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. RWK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMHQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.68, which is comparable to the RWK Sharpe Ratio of 0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMHQ and RWK, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XMHQRWKDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.68

0.94

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.39

0.45

-0.06

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

0.51

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.45

-0.02

Correlation

The correlation between XMHQ and RWK is 0.83, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

XMHQ vs. RWK - Dividend Comparison

XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, less than RWK's 1.25% yield.

TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XMHQ
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF		0.60%0.64%5.20%0.73%1.72%1.00%1.12%1.22%1.59%1.06%1.63%1.34%
RWK
Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF		1.25%1.25%1.11%1.05%1.18%0.85%0.96%1.09%1.22%0.99%1.30%0.92%

Drawdowns

XMHQ vs. RWK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, roughly equal to the maximum RWK drawdown of -56.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and RWK.

Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators

XMHQRWKDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.19%

-56.49%

-1.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.54%

-14.17%

+1.63%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.47%

-24.58%

-0.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.90%

-46.20%

+9.30%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.36%

-7.69%

+2.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.35%

-7.60%

-1.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.43%

4.01%

-0.58%

Volatility

XMHQ vs. RWK - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) have volatilities of 6.03% and 5.93%, 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 graphics...

Volatility by Period

XMHQRWKDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.03%

5.93%

+0.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.37%

12.12%

-0.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.26%

21.97%

-1.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.76%

21.14%

-0.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.69%

22.93%

-2.24%