PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XSHQ vs. FSGS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XSHQ achieves a 9.09% return, which is significantly higher than FSGS's 1.27% return.


XSHQ

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

FSGS

1D
-0.37%
1M
0.83%
YTD
1.27%
6M
0.20%
1Y
4.81%
3Y*
7.06%
5Y*
2.19%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XSHQ
Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF
9.09%0.89%7.49%23.88%-15.01%23.99%11.81%17.37%-6.11%7.18%
FSGS
First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF
1.27%2.41%6.38%15.98%-13.17%25.56%10.26%21.31%-11.92%13.38%

Correlation

The correlation between XSHQ and FSGS is 0.89, 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

0.89

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

0.92

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

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2017

0.85

The correlation between XSHQ and FSGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XSHQ
FSGS

Financial Services

24.0%
19.5%

Industrials

21.1%
22.0%

Technology

17.6%
18.8%

Consumer Cyclical

16.3%
8.0%

Healthcare

8.0%
16.7%

Energy

4.5%
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.0%
5.0%

Basic Materials

2.5%
1.7%

Communication Services

1.0%
3.1%

Real Estate

0.9%
0.9%

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

XSHQ
24.0%
FSGS
19.5%

Industrials

XSHQ
21.1%
FSGS
22.0%

Technology

XSHQ
17.6%
FSGS
18.8%

Consumer Cyclical

XSHQ
16.3%
FSGS
8.0%

Healthcare

XSHQ
8.0%
FSGS
16.7%

Energy

XSHQ
4.5%
FSGS
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

XSHQ
4.0%
FSGS
5.0%

Basic Materials

XSHQ
2.5%
FSGS
1.7%

Communication Services

XSHQ
1.0%
FSGS
3.1%

Real Estate

XSHQ
0.9%
FSGS
0.9%

Utilities

XSHQ

-

FSGS

-

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

XSHQ vs. FSGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

XSHQ
XSHQ Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
XSHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XSHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
XSHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
XSHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
XSHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank

FSGS
FSGS Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
FSGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FSGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
FSGS Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
FSGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
FSGS Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
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.

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS). 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.


XSHQFSGSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

1.06

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.48

0.43

+1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.06

1.21

+2.84

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XSHQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is higher than the FSGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XSHQ and FSGS, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XSHQFSGSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

0.32

+0.56

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

0.11

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

0.30

+0.06

Drawdowns

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XSHQ drawdown since its inception was -38.33%, smaller than the maximum FSGS drawdown of -43.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XSHQ and FSGS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XSHQFSGSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.33%

-43.26%

+4.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.27%

-11.31%

+1.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.34%

-24.08%

-3.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.34%

-24.08%

-3.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.76%

-4.73%

+2.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.35%

-8.03%

-1.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.75%

3.97%

-0.22%

Volatility

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) has a higher volatility of 4.57% compared to First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) at 3.74%. This indicates that XSHQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FSGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XSHQFSGSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.57%

3.74%

+0.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.66%

10.73%

+0.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.43%

15.24%

+2.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.23%

20.14%

+1.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.13%

22.81%

+0.32%

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

XSHQ has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than FSGS's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

XSHQ vs. FSGS - Dividend Comparison

XSHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, while FSGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FSGS
First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF
0.00%0.00%2.71%2.29%1.95%1.35%1.32%1.77%2.13%1.15%
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


XSHQ and FSGS have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XSHQ has higher volatility (4.57%) compared to FSGS (3.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XSHQ dropped -38.33% vs FSGS's -43.26%.

On 5-year performance, XSHQ leads with 5.96% vs 2.19% for FSGS. On fees, XSHQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, FSGS has been the lower-risk option at 3.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, XSHQ has performed better with a 5.96% return vs 2.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XSHQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FSGS.

XSHQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.00% for FSGS.

XSHQ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index, while FSGS tracks SMID Growth Strength Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for XSHQ and 0.60% for FSGS.

XSHQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.88 vs 0.32), 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 XSHQ and FSGS

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