PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMLV vs. OMFL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMLV vs. OMFL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XMLV (Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF) and OMFL (Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMLV is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Low Volatility Index, while OMFL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMLV returned 6.73%/yr vs 8.89%/yr for OMFL. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMLV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for OMFL.

Performance

XMLV vs. OMFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) and Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMLV achieves a 6.54% return, which is significantly lower than OMFL's 10.40% return.

XMLV

1D
1.16%
1M
0.71%
YTD
6.54%
6M
5.89%
1Y
8.99%
3Y*
12.11%
5Y*
6.73%
10Y*
8.05%

OMFL

1D
-1.45%
1M
-1.15%
YTD
10.40%
6M
9.24%
1Y
20.52%
3Y*
13.20%
5Y*
8.89%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMLV vs. OMFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMLV
Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF		6.54%5.55%17.08%1.86%-6.55%23.00%-8.42%23.77%-0.16%1.55%
OMFL
Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF		10.40%13.68%6.82%21.53%-13.97%28.95%20.91%35.58%-2.55%5.12%

Correlation

The correlation between XMLV and OMFL is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.36

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

0.62

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2017

0.71

Over the past year, the correlation between XMLV and OMFL has dropped to 0.36 - well below their long-term average of 0.71, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

XMLV vs. OMFL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMLV
OMFL

Real Estate

33.7%
0.8%

Financial Services

24.2%
11.0%

Utilities

18.5%
0.3%

Industrials

9.8%
9.2%

Consumer Cyclical

4.4%
9.2%

Energy

3.7%
3.3%

Consumer Defensive

2.5%
8.3%

Healthcare

2.1%
9.9%

Basic Materials

1.1%
2.4%

Communication Services

1.0%
11.2%

Technology

1.0%
34.5%

Real Estate

XMLV
33.7%
OMFL
0.8%

Financial Services

XMLV
24.2%
OMFL
11.0%

Utilities

XMLV
18.5%
OMFL
0.3%

Industrials

XMLV
9.8%
OMFL
9.2%

Consumer Cyclical

XMLV
4.4%
OMFL
9.2%

Energy

XMLV
3.7%
OMFL
3.3%

Consumer Defensive

XMLV
2.5%
OMFL
8.3%

Healthcare

XMLV
2.1%
OMFL
9.9%

Basic Materials

XMLV
1.1%
OMFL
2.4%

Communication Services

XMLV
1.0%
OMFL
11.2%

Technology

XMLV
1.0%
OMFL
34.5%

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 Low Volatility ETF

Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF

Often compared with XMLV:
XMLV vs. SPLVXMLV vs. USMVXMLV vs. VOXMLV vs. VOOXMLV vs. MDYXMLV vs. IWMXMLV vs. FTBFX
Often compared with OMFL:
OMFL vs. SPGPOMFL vs. OMFSOMFL vs. SCHDOMFL vs. CALMOMFL vs. QQQSOMFL vs. WTVOMFL vs. RWL

Return for Risk

XMLV vs. OMFL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMLV
XMLV Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
XMLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMLV Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
XMLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMLV Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
OMFL
OMFL Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
OMFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMFL Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
OMFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMFL Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

XMLV vs. OMFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) and Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL). 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.

XMLVOMFLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.85
1.65

-0.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.26
2.30

-1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.30

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.28

2.72

-1.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.18

12.06

-7.89

XMLV vs. OMFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMLV Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is lower than the OMFL Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMLV and OMFL, 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

XMLV vs. OMFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMLV drawdown since its inception was -39.86%, which is greater than OMFL's maximum drawdown of -33.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMLV and OMFL.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMLVOMFLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.86%

-33.24%

-6.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.03%

-7.58%

+0.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.80%

-15.52%

+1.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.53%

-22.44%

+5.91%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.86%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.18%

-2.57%

+1.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.25%

-4.78%

+0.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.16%

1.71%

+0.45%

Volatility

XMLV vs. OMFL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) is 4.09%, while Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL) has a volatility of 4.33%. This indicates that XMLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than OMFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMLVOMFLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.09%

4.33%

-0.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.86%

10.03%

-2.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.70%

12.54%

-1.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.48%

16.81%

-2.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.97%

20.09%

-3.12%

XMLV vs. OMFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMLV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than OMFL's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMLV vs. OMFL - Dividend Comparison

XMLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.98%, more than OMFL's 0.83% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
OMFL
Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF		0.83%0.80%1.22%1.37%1.55%0.95%1.48%1.53%1.39%0.32%0.00%0.00%
XMLV
Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF		2.98%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

XMLV and OMFL have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

OMFL has higher volatility (4.33%) compared to XMLV (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMLV dropped -39.86% vs OMFL's -33.24%.

On 5-year performance, OMFL leads with 8.89% vs 6.73% for XMLV. On fees, XMLV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XMLV has been the lower-risk option at 4.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, OMFL has performed better with a 8.89% return vs 6.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XMLV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for OMFL.

XMLV has the higher dividend yield at 2.98%, compared with 0.83% for OMFL.

XMLV is categorized as Volatility Hedged Equity, while OMFL is Large Cap Blend Equities. XMLV tracks S&P MidCap 400 Low Volatility Index, while OMFL tracks Russell 1000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMLV and 0.29% for OMFL.

OMFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.65 vs 0.85), 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 XMLV and OMFL

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