XMLV vs. VFMV
XMLV (Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF) and VFMV (Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF) are both Low Volatility funds. XMLV is passively managed, while VFMV is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMLV returned 7.14%/yr vs 9.39%/yr for VFMV. Their correlation of 0.84 means they have usually moved in the same direction. XMLV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFMV.
Performance
XMLV vs. VFMV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XMLV having a 11.48% return and VFMV slightly lower at 11.10%.
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%
VFMV
- 1D
- 0.45%
- 1M
- 2.10%
- 6M
- 7.34%
- YTD
- 11.10%
- 1Y
- 16.07%
- 3Y*
- 14.38%
- 5Y*
- 9.39%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 10.08%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.77M | $2.11M | $2.29M | |
| $1.62M | $1.47M | $1.28M |
XMLV vs. VFMV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMLV Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF | 11.48% | 5.55% | 17.08% | 1.86% | -6.55% | 23.00% | -8.42% | 23.77% | 3.09% |
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF | 11.10% | 10.52% | 16.91% | 8.86% | -5.73% | 20.75% | -0.19% | 27.26% | -0.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMLV and VFMV is 0.73, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.73 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.81 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 15, 2018 | 0.84 |
The correlation between XMLV and VFMV shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.85 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XMLV vs. VFMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMLV
VFMV
Real Estate
Financial Services
Utilities
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
Technology
Real Estate
XMLV
VFMV
Financial Services
XMLV
VFMV
Utilities
XMLV
VFMV
Industrials
XMLV
VFMV
Consumer Cyclical
XMLV
VFMV
Energy
XMLV
VFMV
Consumer Defensive
XMLV
VFMV
Healthcare
XMLV
VFMV
Basic Materials
XMLV
VFMV
-
Communication Services
XMLV
VFMV
Technology
XMLV
VFMV
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
XMLV vs. VFMV — Risk / Return Rank
XMLV
VFMV
XMLV vs. VFMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV). 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 | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.43 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.31 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.19 | 2.61 | -0.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.26 | 10.07 | -2.82 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XMLV vs. VFMV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMLV drawdown since its inception was -39.86%, which is greater than VFMV's maximum drawdown of -33.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMLV and VFMV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMLV | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.86% | -33.64% | -6.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.03% | -6.00% | -1.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.80% | -10.35% | -3.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.53% | -15.41% | -1.12% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.14% | -1.16% | -0.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.22% | -3.59% | -0.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.12% | 1.56% | +0.56% |
Volatility
XMLV vs. VFMV - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) has a higher volatility of 3.85% compared to Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) at 2.73%. This indicates that XMLV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VFMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMLV | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.85% | 2.73% | +1.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.30% | 6.57% | +1.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.82% | 8.96% | +1.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.50% | 11.76% | +2.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.97% | 14.16% | +2.81% |
XMLV vs. VFMV - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMLV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMV'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
XMLV vs. VFMV - Dividend Comparison
XMLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.85%, more than VFMV's 1.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF | 1.74% | 2.12% | 1.46% | 2.20% | 2.08% | 1.31% | 2.14% | 2.43% | 2.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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
XMLV and VFMV have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XMLV has higher volatility (3.85%) compared to VFMV (2.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMLV dropped -39.86% vs VFMV's -33.64%.
On 5-year performance, VFMV leads with 9.39% vs 7.14% for XMLV. On fees, VFMV is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, VFMV has been the lower-risk option at 2.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, VFMV has performed better with a 9.39% return vs 7.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VFMV is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMLV.
XMLV has the higher dividend yield at 2.85%, compared with 1.74% for VFMV.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMLV and 0.13% for VFMV.
VFMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 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.
Find the right allocation for XMLV and VFMV
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