XSHQ vs. PBW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XSHQ (Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF) and PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds from Invesco - XSHQ tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index while PBW tracks the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XSHQ returned 6.38%/yr vs -13.40%/yr for PBW. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XSHQ charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for PBW.

Performance

XSHQ vs. PBW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). 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 PBW's 28.31% return.

XSHQ

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

PBW

• 1D: -5.58%
• 1M: -8.98%
• YTD: 28.31%
• 6M: 22.11%
• 1Y: 107.61%
• 3Y*: 3.84%
• 5Y*: -13.40%
• 10Y*: 9.92%

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

XSHQ vs. PBW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XSHQ Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF	11.54%	0.89%	7.49%	23.88%	-15.01%	23.99%	11.81%	17.37%	-6.11%	7.18%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	28.31%	53.96%	-30.77%	-20.03%	-44.55%	-29.86%	204.82%	62.58%	-14.11%	19.61%

Correlation

The correlation between XSHQ and PBW is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 24, 2017	0.61

The correlation between XSHQ and PBW shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.64 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XSHQ vs. PBW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XSHQ	PBW
Financial Services	23.4%	1.5%
Industrials	20.9%	34.2%
Technology	19.8%	14.4%
Consumer Cyclical	14.4%	14.9%
Healthcare	8.8%	-
Energy	4.4%	11.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	1.1%
Basic Materials	2.5%	16.2%
Real Estate	1.0%	-
Communication Services	0.9%	-
Utilities	-	6.5%

Return for Risk

XSHQ vs. PBW — 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

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 75
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 63
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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. PBW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). 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	PBW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.02	2.55	-1.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.63	2.89	-1.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.36	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.73	5.09	-3.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.75	13.07	-8.32

XSHQ vs. PBW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XSHQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is lower than the PBW Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XSHQ and PBW, 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. PBW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XSHQ drawdown since its inception was -38.33%, smaller than the maximum PBW drawdown of -89.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XSHQ and PBW.

Drawdown Indicators

	XSHQ	PBW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.33%	-89.02%	+50.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.27%	-21.24%	+10.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.34%	-68.04%	+40.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.34%	-84.50%	+57.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-89.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.74%	-67.66%	+66.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.29%	-62.90%	+53.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.74%	8.26%	-4.52%

Volatility

XSHQ vs. PBW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) is 4.09%, while Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a volatility of 17.93%. This indicates that XSHQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XSHQ	PBW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.09%	17.93%	-13.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.87%	31.32%	-19.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.52%	42.50%	-24.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.22%	43.39%	-22.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.09%	39.02%	-15.93%

XSHQ vs. PBW - Expense Ratio Comparison

XSHQ has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than PBW's 0.61% expense ratio.

Dividends

XSHQ vs. PBW - Dividend Comparison

XSHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, which matches PBW's 1.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	1.21%	0.79%	2.84%	3.68%	4.21%	1.71%	0.44%	1.45%	2.04%	1.28%	2.68%	1.53%
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%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XSHQ and PBW in my portfolio?

XSHQ and PBW have a correlation of 0.49, 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 PBW?

PBW has higher volatility (17.93%) compared to XSHQ (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XSHQ dropped -38.33% vs PBW's -89.02%.

Which ETF is better, XSHQ or PBW?

On 5-year performance, XSHQ leads with 6.38% vs -13.40% for PBW. On fees, XSHQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. 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 PBW?

Over the 5-year period, XSHQ has performed better with a 6.38% return vs -13.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XSHQ or PBW?

XSHQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

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

XSHQ and PBW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.21%.

What is the main difference between XSHQ and PBW?

XSHQ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index, while PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). Their fees differ too: 0.29% for XSHQ and 0.61% for PBW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 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.