XMHQ vs. VFMO
XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) and VFMO (Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while VFMO is a Momentum fund actively managed by Vanguard. XMHQ is passively managed, while VFMO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMHQ returned 9.36%/yr vs 14.02%/yr for VFMO. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XMHQ charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFMO.
Performance
XMHQ vs. VFMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 7.73% return, which is significantly lower than VFMO's 25.84% return.
XMHQ
- 1D
- -1.05%
- 1M
- 1.58%
- YTD
- 7.73%
- 6M
- 5.47%
- 1Y
- 14.55%
- 3Y*
- 14.98%
- 5Y*
- 9.36%
- 10Y*
- 12.91%
VFMO
- 1D
- -2.31%
- 1M
- 4.69%
- YTD
- 25.84%
- 6M
- 22.71%
- 1Y
- 44.30%
- 3Y*
- 27.88%
- 5Y*
- 14.02%
- 10Y*
- —
XMHQ vs. VFMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 7.73% | 4.71% | 16.79% | 29.51% | -12.42% | 20.98% | 26.61% | 27.18% | -7.55% |
VFMO Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF | 25.84% | 17.39% | 26.14% | 16.25% | -12.84% | 19.16% | 31.36% | 28.22% | -11.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMHQ and VFMO is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 15, 2018 | 0.81 |
The correlation between XMHQ and VFMO shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (1 year) to 0.86 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XMHQ vs. VFMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMHQ
VFMO
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Industrials
XMHQ
VFMO
Healthcare
XMHQ
VFMO
Financial Services
XMHQ
VFMO
Technology
XMHQ
VFMO
Consumer Cyclical
XMHQ
VFMO
Energy
XMHQ
VFMO
Basic Materials
XMHQ
VFMO
Consumer Defensive
XMHQ
VFMO
Communication Services
XMHQ
VFMO
Utilities
XMHQ
VFMO
Real Estate
XMHQ
-
VFMO
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. VFMO — Risk / Return Rank
XMHQ
VFMO
XMHQ vs. VFMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF (VFMO). 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 | VFMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.34 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.65 | 4.05 | -2.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.82 | 15.07 | -10.25 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XMHQ vs. VFMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than VFMO's maximum drawdown of -36.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and VFMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMHQ | VFMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.19% | -36.77% | -21.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.85% | -10.98% | +2.13% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.56% | -24.40% | -0.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.47% | -25.80% | +0.33% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.30% | -2.31% | +0.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.27% | -7.73% | -1.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.03% | 2.95% | +0.08% |
Volatility
XMHQ vs. VFMO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) is 4.52%, while Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF (VFMO) has a volatility of 8.33%. This indicates that XMHQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VFMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMHQ | VFMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.52% | 8.33% | -3.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.46% | 17.49% | -6.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.77% | 22.34% | -6.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.74% | 21.90% | -1.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.68% | 23.64% | -2.96% |
XMHQ vs. VFMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMO's 0.13% 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. VFMO - Dividend Comparison
XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%, more than VFMO's 0.39% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VFMO Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF | 0.39% | 0.82% | 0.72% | 0.89% | 1.72% | 0.81% | 0.45% | 1.22% | 0.70% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 0.59% | 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 VFMO have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
VFMO has higher volatility (8.33%) compared to XMHQ (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs VFMO's -36.77%.
On 5-year performance, VFMO leads with 14.02% vs 9.36% for XMHQ. On fees, VFMO is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, XMHQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, VFMO has performed better with a 14.02% return vs 9.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VFMO is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMHQ.
XMHQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.59%, compared with 0.39% for VFMO.
XMHQ is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while VFMO is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.13% for VFMO.
VFMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 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 VFMO
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