XSHQ vs. CAFG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XSHQ (Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF) and CAFG (Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - XSHQ tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index while CAFG tracks the Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XSHQ returned 11.81%/yr vs 14.49%/yr for CAFG. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XSHQ charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for CAFG.

Performance

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XSHQ achieves a 9.09% return, which is significantly lower than CAFG's 25.78% return.

XSHQ

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 1.37%
• YTD: 9.09%
• 6M: 8.27%
• 1Y: 15.18%
• 3Y*: 11.81%
• 5Y*: 5.96%
• 10Y*: —

CAFG

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 4.31%
• YTD: 25.78%
• 6M: 24.70%
• 1Y: 31.67%
• 3Y*: 14.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XSHQ Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF	9.09%	0.89%	7.49%	25.07%
CAFG Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	25.78%	0.17%	6.95%	20.44%

Correlation

The correlation between XSHQ and CAFG is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2023	0.90

The correlation between XSHQ and CAFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XSHQ	CAFG
Financial Services	24.0%	-
Industrials	21.1%	19.3%
Technology	17.6%	30.8%
Consumer Cyclical	16.3%	7.2%
Healthcare	8.0%	18.8%
Energy	4.5%	13.4%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	3.0%
Basic Materials	2.5%	2.4%
Communication Services	1.0%	3.7%
Real Estate	0.9%	-
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

XSHQ vs. CAFG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

XSHQ

XSHQ Risk / Return Rank: 26
XSHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
XSHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
XSHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 23
XSHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
XSHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 28

CAFG

CAFG Risk / Return Rank: 61
CAFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
CAFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CAFG Omega Ratio Rank: 50
CAFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
CAFG Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG). 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.

	XSHQ	CAFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.88	1.83	-0.95
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.42	2.63	-1.21
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.31	-0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.48	3.91	-2.43
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.06	12.74	-8.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XSHQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is lower than the CAFG Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XSHQ and CAFG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XSHQ	CAFG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88	1.83	-0.95
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	0.87	-0.51

Drawdowns

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XSHQ drawdown since its inception was -38.33%, which is greater than CAFG's maximum drawdown of -23.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XSHQ and CAFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	XSHQ	CAFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.33%	-23.66%	-14.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.27%	-8.13%	-2.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.34%	-23.66%	-3.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.34%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.76%	-0.38%	-1.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.35%	-5.53%	-3.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.75%	2.49%	+1.26%

Volatility

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) is 4.57%, while Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG) has a volatility of 5.20%. This indicates that XSHQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CAFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XSHQ	CAFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.57%	5.20%	-0.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.66%	12.75%	-1.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.43%	17.40%	+0.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.23%	19.58%	+1.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.13%	19.58%	+3.55%

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XSHQ has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than CAFG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

XSHQ vs. CAFG - Dividend Comparison

XSHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, more than CAFG's 0.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CAFG Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.27%	0.35%	0.36%	0.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XSHQ Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF	1.38%	1.48%	1.18%	1.15%	2.02%	1.25%	1.24%	1.11%	1.16%	0.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XSHQ and CAFG in my portfolio?

XSHQ and CAFG have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XSHQ or CAFG?

CAFG has higher volatility (5.20%) compared to XSHQ (4.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XSHQ dropped -38.33% vs CAFG's -23.66%.

Which ETF is better, XSHQ or CAFG?

On 3-year performance, CAFG leads with 14.49% vs 11.81% for XSHQ. On fees, XSHQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, XSHQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XSHQ or CAFG?

Over the 3-year period, CAFG has performed better with a 14.49% return vs 11.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XSHQ or CAFG?

XSHQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for CAFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XSHQ or CAFG?

XSHQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.27% for CAFG.

What is the main difference between XSHQ and CAFG?

XSHQ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index, while CAFG tracks Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for XSHQ and 0.59% for CAFG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 0.88), 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.