XMLV vs. CDL

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

XMLV (Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF) and CDL (VictoryShares US Large Cap High Dividend Volatility Wtd ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMLV is a Low Volatility fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Low Volatility Index, while CDL is a Dividend fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap High Dividend 100 Volatility Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMLV returned 8.01%/yr vs 11.17%/yr for CDL. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. XMLV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CDL.

Performance

XMLV vs. CDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) and VictoryShares US Large Cap High Dividend Volatility Wtd ETF (CDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMLV achieves a 11.48% return, which is significantly lower than CDL's 17.17% return. Over the past 10 years, XMLV has underperformed CDL with an annualized return of 8.01%, while CDL has yielded a comparatively higher 11.17% annualized return.

XMLV

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 1.77%
• 6M: 8.77%
• YTD: 11.48%
• 1Y: 15.65%
• 3Y*: 11.57%
• 5Y*: 7.14%
• 10Y*: 8.01%
• ALL TIME*: 9.98%

CDL

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 0.29%
• 6M: 10.38%
• YTD: 17.17%
• 1Y: 22.30%
• 3Y*: 14.61%
• 5Y*: 10.44%
• 10Y*: 11.17%
• ALL TIME*: 11.29%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CDL VictoryShares US Large Cap High Dividend Volatility Wtd ETF	$504.48K	$625.50K	$553.90K
XMLV Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF	$1.62M	$1.47M	$1.28M

XMLV vs. CDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XMLV Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF	11.48%	5.55%	17.08%	1.86%	-6.55%	23.00%	-8.42%	23.77%	-0.16%	13.72%
CDL VictoryShares US Large Cap High Dividend Volatility Wtd ETF	17.17%	9.04%	15.58%	3.03%	-0.45%	33.42%	-3.35%	26.38%	-5.86%	16.29%

Correlation

The correlation between XMLV and CDL is 0.83, 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.	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.84
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.86
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2015	0.82

The correlation between XMLV and CDL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMLV vs. CDL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMLV	CDL
Real Estate	32.8%	0.0%
Financial Services	26.0%	24.1%
Utilities	17.8%	24.3%
Industrials	10.0%	2.3%
Consumer Cyclical	4.4%	7.0%
Energy	3.7%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	15.7%
Healthcare	2.0%	7.2%
Basic Materials	1.0%	0.0%
Communication Services	1.0%	3.9%
Technology	1.0%	6.9%

Return for Risk

XMLV vs. CDL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XMLV

XMLV Risk / Return Rank: 61
XMLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
XMLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
XMLV Omega Ratio Rank: 55
XMLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
XMLV Martin Ratio Rank: 61

CDL

CDL Risk / Return Rank: 88
CDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
CDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
CDL Omega Ratio Rank: 84
CDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CDL Martin Ratio Rank: 89

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XMLV vs. CDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) and VictoryShares US Large Cap High Dividend Volatility Wtd ETF (CDL). 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.

	XMLV	CDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	2.13	-0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	3.18	-1.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.36	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.19	3.87	-1.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.26	13.78	-6.52

XMLV vs. CDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the CDL Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMLV and CDL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XMLV vs. CDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMLV drawdown since its inception was -39.86%, roughly equal to the maximum CDL drawdown of -41.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMLV and CDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMLV	CDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.86%	-41.03%	+1.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.03%	-5.66%	-1.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.80%	-12.87%	-0.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.53%	-17.28%	+0.75%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.86%	-41.03%	+1.17%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.14%	-2.35%	+0.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.22%	-4.29%	+0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	1.59%	+0.53%

Volatility

XMLV vs. CDL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) is 3.85%, while VictoryShares US Large Cap High Dividend Volatility Wtd ETF (CDL) has a volatility of 4.20%. This indicates that XMLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMLV	CDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.85%	4.20%	-0.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.30%	7.85%	+0.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.82%	10.34%	+0.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.50%	13.88%	+0.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.97%	17.04%	-0.07%

XMLV vs. CDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMLV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CDL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMLV vs. CDL - Dividend Comparison

XMLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.85%, less than CDL's 3.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CDL VictoryShares US Large Cap High Dividend Volatility Wtd ETF	3.06%	3.33%	3.27%	3.61%	3.31%	2.60%	3.32%	3.04%	3.32%	2.87%	2.97%	1.28%
XMLV Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF	2.85%	2.87%	2.23%	2.34%	2.05%	1.14%	1.93%	2.02%	2.13%	1.74%	1.72%	1.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMLV and CDL in my portfolio?

XMLV and CDL have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XMLV or CDL?

CDL has higher volatility (4.20%) compared to XMLV (3.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMLV dropped -39.86% vs CDL's -41.03%.

Which ETF is better, XMLV or CDL?

On 10-year performance, CDL leads with 11.17% vs 8.01% for XMLV. On fees, XMLV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XMLV has been the lower-risk option at 3.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XMLV or CDL?

Over the 10-year period, CDL has performed better with a 11.17% return vs 8.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMLV or CDL?

XMLV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CDL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XMLV or CDL?

CDL has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 2.85% for XMLV.

What is the main difference between XMLV and CDL?

XMLV is categorized as Low Volatility, while CDL is Dividend. XMLV tracks S&P MidCap 400 Low Volatility Index, while CDL tracks Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap High Dividend 100 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMLV and 0.35% for CDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 1.43), 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.