PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMVM vs. VBR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMVM vs. VBR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF (XMVM) and Vanguard Small-Cap Value ETF (VBR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with XMVM having a 18.13% return and VBR slightly higher at 18.17%. Over the past 10 years, XMVM has outperformed VBR with an annualized return of 12.28%, while VBR has yielded a comparatively lower 10.67% annualized return.


XMVM

1D
0.59%
1M
5.73%
6M
13.53%
YTD
18.13%
1Y
39.09%
3Y*
18.08%
5Y*
12.87%
10Y*
12.28%
ALL TIME*
9.73%

VBR

1D
1.27%
1M
1.85%
6M
11.26%
YTD
18.17%
1Y
29.28%
3Y*
15.36%
5Y*
10.29%
10Y*
10.67%
ALL TIME*
9.72%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$57.38M$55.84M$67.82M
$2.19M$2.07M$1.98M

XMVM vs. VBR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMVM
Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF
18.13%18.46%11.73%16.31%-8.21%35.15%5.68%30.38%-9.62%2.79%
VBR
Vanguard Small-Cap Value ETF
18.17%9.09%12.40%16.00%-9.38%28.08%5.90%22.78%-12.28%11.81%

Correlation

The correlation between XMVM and VBR 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.

0.92

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.94

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2005

0.90

The correlation between XMVM and VBR shifts across timeframes, from 0.83 (1 year) to 0.94 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMVM vs. VBR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XMVM
VBR

Financial Services

37.9%
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

14.8%
13.6%

Energy

13.5%
4.3%

Industrials

11.7%
17.3%

Utilities

8.5%
4.9%

Technology

5.1%
10.9%

Real Estate

4.9%
11.1%

Healthcare

2.5%
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.2%
4.2%

Communication Services

0.9%
2.4%

Basic Materials

0.8%
5.3%

Financial Services

XMVM
37.9%
VBR
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

XMVM
14.8%
VBR
13.6%

Energy

XMVM
13.5%
VBR
4.3%

Industrials

XMVM
11.7%
VBR
17.3%

Utilities

XMVM
8.5%
VBR
4.9%

Technology

XMVM
5.1%
VBR
10.9%

Real Estate

XMVM
4.9%
VBR
11.1%

Healthcare

XMVM
2.5%
VBR
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

XMVM
1.2%
VBR
4.2%

Communication Services

XMVM
0.9%
VBR
2.4%

Basic Materials

XMVM
0.8%
VBR
5.3%

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

XMVM vs. VBR — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMVM
XMVM Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
XMVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMVM Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
XMVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMVM Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

VBR
VBR Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
VBR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VBR Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
VBR Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
VBR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
VBR Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XMVM vs. VBR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF (XMVM) and Vanguard Small-Cap Value ETF (VBR). 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.


XMVMVBRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.93

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.35

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.28

3.32

+0.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.71

12.14

+1.57

XMVM vs. VBR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMVM Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is higher than the VBR Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMVM and VBR, 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

XMVM vs. VBR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMVM drawdown since its inception was -62.83%, roughly equal to the maximum VBR drawdown of -61.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMVM and VBR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMVMVBRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.83%

-61.98%

-0.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.18%

-8.85%

-0.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.12%

-24.19%

+0.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.12%

-24.19%

+0.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.07%

-45.28%

+0.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.12%

-0.15%

+0.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.19%

-8.21%

-1.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.86%

2.42%

+0.44%

Volatility

XMVM vs. VBR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF (XMVM) is 3.30%, while Vanguard Small-Cap Value ETF (VBR) has a volatility of 3.58%. This indicates that XMVM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VBR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMVMVBRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.30%

3.58%

-0.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.25%

10.28%

-1.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.72%

14.86%

-0.14%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.24%

19.57%

+1.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.74%

21.67%

+1.07%

XMVM vs. VBR - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMVM has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than VBR's 0.05% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMVM vs. VBR - Dividend Comparison

XMVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.78%, more than VBR's 1.74% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
VBR
Vanguard Small-Cap Value ETF
1.74%1.95%1.98%2.12%2.03%1.75%1.68%2.06%2.35%1.79%1.77%1.99%
XMVM
Invesco S&P MidCap Value with Momentum ETF
1.78%2.07%1.43%1.57%1.76%1.10%1.37%1.73%2.87%2.22%2.27%2.58%

Frequently Asked Questions


XMVM and VBR 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.

VBR has higher volatility (3.58%) compared to XMVM (3.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMVM dropped -62.83% vs VBR's -61.98%.

On 10-year performance, XMVM leads with 12.28% vs 10.67% for VBR. On fees, VBR is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, XMVM has been the lower-risk option at 3.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XMVM has performed better with a 12.28% return vs 10.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VBR is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for XMVM.

XMVM has the higher dividend yield at 1.78%, compared with 1.74% for VBR.

XMVM is categorized as Momentum, while VBR is Small Cap Value Equities. XMVM tracks S&P MidCap 400 High Momentum Value Index, while VBR tracks CRSP US Small Cap Value Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for XMVM and 0.05% for VBR.

XMVM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 1.98), 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 XMVM and VBR

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