XMHQ vs. VFQY
XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) and VFQY (Vanguard U.S. Quality Factor ETF) are both Quality Factor funds. XMHQ is passively managed, while VFQY is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMHQ returned 10.44%/yr vs 9.15%/yr for VFQY. Their correlation of 0.90 means they have usually moved in the same direction. XMHQ charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFQY.
Performance
XMHQ vs. VFQY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with XMHQ having a 13.81% return and VFQY slightly higher at 14.20%.
XMHQ
- 1D
- 1.13%
- 1M
- 2.55%
- 6M
- 8.92%
- YTD
- 13.81%
- 1Y
- 17.48%
- 3Y*
- 14.23%
- 5Y*
- 10.44%
- 10Y*
- 12.81%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.54%
VFQY
- 1D
- 1.05%
- 1M
- 2.21%
- 6M
- 10.27%
- YTD
- 14.20%
- 1Y
- 23.29%
- 3Y*
- 15.72%
- 5Y*
- 9.15%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 11.62%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $948.51K | $988.82K | $1.06M | |
| $19.09M | $19.28M | $20.51M |
XMHQ vs. VFQY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 13.81% | 4.71% | 16.79% | 29.51% | -12.42% | 20.98% | 26.61% | 27.18% | -7.55% |
VFQY Vanguard U.S. Quality Factor ETF | 14.20% | 10.24% | 12.93% | 22.48% | -15.74% | 27.96% | 16.97% | 25.75% | -8.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMHQ and VFQY is 0.86, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.86 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 15, 2018 | 0.90 |
The correlation between XMHQ and VFQY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
XMHQ vs. VFQY - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMHQ
VFQY
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
-
-
Industrials
XMHQ
VFQY
Technology
XMHQ
VFQY
Healthcare
XMHQ
VFQY
Financial Services
XMHQ
VFQY
Consumer Cyclical
XMHQ
VFQY
Energy
XMHQ
VFQY
Utilities
XMHQ
VFQY
-
Basic Materials
XMHQ
VFQY
Communication Services
XMHQ
VFQY
Consumer Defensive
XMHQ
VFQY
Real Estate
XMHQ
-
VFQY
-
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. VFQY — Risk / Return Rank
XMHQ
VFQY
XMHQ vs. VFQY - 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. Quality Factor ETF (VFQY). 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 | VFQY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.77 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.30 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.98 | 2.57 | -0.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.90 | 9.69 | -3.79 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XMHQ vs. VFQY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than VFQY's maximum drawdown of -37.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and VFQY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMHQ | VFQY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.19% | -37.41% | -20.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.85% | -9.12% | +0.27% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.56% | -20.67% | -3.89% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.47% | -25.93% | +0.46% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.22% | -6.57% | -2.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.97% | 2.41% | +0.56% |
Volatility
XMHQ vs. VFQY - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) has a higher volatility of 3.28% compared to Vanguard U.S. Quality Factor ETF (VFQY) at 3.12%. This indicates that XMHQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VFQY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMHQ | VFQY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.28% | 3.12% | +0.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.03% | 9.58% | +1.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.18% | 13.37% | +1.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.58% | 18.29% | +2.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.64% | 20.73% | -0.09% |
XMHQ vs. VFQY - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than VFQY'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. VFQY - Dividend Comparison
XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%, less than VFQY's 1.03% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VFQY Vanguard U.S. Quality Factor ETF | 1.03% | 1.17% | 1.34% | 1.38% | 1.43% | 0.98% | 1.22% | 1.34% | 1.31% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF | 0.56% | 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 VFQY have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XMHQ has higher volatility (3.28%) compared to VFQY (3.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs VFQY's -37.41%.
On 5-year performance, XMHQ leads with 10.44% vs 9.15% for VFQY. On fees, VFQY is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, VFQY has been the lower-risk option at 3.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 10.44% return vs 9.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VFQY is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMHQ.
VFQY has the higher dividend yield at 1.03%, compared with 0.56% for XMHQ.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.13% for VFQY.
VFQY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.16), 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 VFQY
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