XSHQ vs. FSMD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XSHQ (Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF) and FSMD (Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - XSHQ tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index while FSMD tracks the Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XSHQ returned 6.38%/yr vs 10.30%/yr for FSMD. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.29% expense ratio.

Performance

XSHQ vs. FSMD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XSHQ achieves a 11.54% return, which is significantly lower than FSMD's 17.21% return.

XSHQ

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: 2.36%
• YTD: 11.54%
• 6M: 9.12%
• 1Y: 17.70%
• 3Y*: 12.17%
• 5Y*: 6.38%
• 10Y*: —

FSMD

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: 3.70%
• YTD: 17.21%
• 6M: 15.00%
• 1Y: 27.16%
• 3Y*: 18.35%
• 5Y*: 10.30%
• 10Y*: —

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

XSHQ vs. FSMD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
XSHQ Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF	11.54%	0.89%	7.49%	23.88%	-15.01%	23.99%	11.81%	5.55%
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF	17.21%	8.70%	15.18%	17.37%	-11.15%	26.40%	8.94%	8.81%

Correlation

The correlation between XSHQ and FSMD is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2019	0.92

The correlation between XSHQ and FSMD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

XSHQ vs. FSMD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XSHQ	FSMD
Financial Services	23.4%	14.8%
Industrials	20.9%	20.1%
Technology	19.8%	20.5%
Consumer Cyclical	14.4%	10.6%
Healthcare	8.8%	11.7%
Energy	4.4%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	3.1%
Basic Materials	2.5%	4.0%
Real Estate	1.0%	6.2%
Communication Services	0.9%	2.9%
Utilities	-	2.1%

Return for Risk

XSHQ vs. FSMD — Risk / Return Rank

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

XSHQ

XSHQ Risk / Return Rank: 32
XSHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
XSHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
XSHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 27
XSHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
XSHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 33

FSMD

FSMD Risk / Return Rank: 58
FSMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
FSMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
FSMD Omega Ratio Rank: 50
FSMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
FSMD Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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. FSMD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD). 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.

	XSHQ	FSMD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.02	1.74	-0.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.63	2.53	-0.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.30	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.73	3.23	-1.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.75	11.62	-6.88

XSHQ vs. FSMD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XSHQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is lower than the FSMD Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XSHQ and FSMD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XSHQ vs. FSMD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XSHQ drawdown since its inception was -38.33%, smaller than the maximum FSMD drawdown of -40.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XSHQ and FSMD.

Drawdown Indicators

	XSHQ	FSMD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.33%	-40.67%	+2.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.27%	-8.44%	-1.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.34%	-22.16%	-5.18%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.34%	-22.16%	-5.18%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.74%	-1.31%	+0.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.29%	-5.96%	-3.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.74%	2.34%	+1.40%

Volatility

XSHQ vs. FSMD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) is 4.09%, while Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) has a volatility of 5.08%. This indicates that XSHQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FSMD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XSHQ	FSMD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.09%	5.08%	-0.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.87%	12.00%	-0.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.52%	15.76%	+1.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.22%	18.54%	+2.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.09%	21.41%	+1.68%

XSHQ vs. FSMD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XSHQ and FSMD have an expense ratio of 0.29%.

Dividends

XSHQ vs. FSMD - Dividend Comparison

XSHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, less than FSMD's 1.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF	1.24%	1.33%	1.29%	1.37%	1.54%	1.18%	1.32%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%
XSHQ Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF	1.21%	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 FSMD in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, XSHQ and FSMD move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, XSHQ or FSMD?

FSMD has higher volatility (5.08%) compared to XSHQ (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XSHQ dropped -38.33% vs FSMD's -40.67%.

Which ETF is better, XSHQ or FSMD?

On 5-year performance, FSMD leads with 10.30% vs 6.38% for XSHQ. Both ETFs have the same 0.29% expense ratio. On volatility, XSHQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XSHQ or FSMD?

Over the 5-year period, FSMD has performed better with a 10.30% return vs 6.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XSHQ or FSMD?

XSHQ and FSMD have the same expense ratio: 0.29% per year.

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

FSMD has the higher dividend yield at 1.24%, compared with 1.21% for XSHQ.

What is the main difference between XSHQ and FSMD?

XSHQ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index, while FSMD tracks Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FSMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.02), 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.