XSHQ vs. XLG
XSHQ (Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XSHQ is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XSHQ returned 5.96%/yr vs 16.24%/yr for XLG. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XSHQ charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.
Performance
XSHQ vs. XLG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XSHQ achieves a 9.09% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 7.57% return.
XSHQ
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- 1.37%
- YTD
- 9.09%
- 6M
- 8.27%
- 1Y
- 15.18%
- 3Y*
- 11.81%
- 5Y*
- 5.96%
- 10Y*
- —
XLG
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- 4.22%
- YTD
- 7.57%
- 6M
- 7.32%
- 1Y
- 28.54%
- 3Y*
- 24.46%
- 5Y*
- 16.24%
- 10Y*
- 17.27%
XSHQ vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 7.57% | 19.51% | 33.49% | 38.16% | -24.29% | 30.77% | 24.15% | 32.04% | -3.59% | 10.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between XSHQ and XLG is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2017 | 0.58 |
The correlation between XSHQ and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.61 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XSHQ vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XSHQ
XLG
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
XSHQ
XLG
Industrials
XSHQ
XLG
Technology
XSHQ
XLG
Consumer Cyclical
XSHQ
XLG
Healthcare
XSHQ
XLG
Energy
XSHQ
XLG
Consumer Defensive
XSHQ
XLG
Basic Materials
XSHQ
XLG
Communication Services
XSHQ
XLG
Real Estate
XSHQ
XLG
-
Utilities
XSHQ
-
XLG
-
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. XLG — Risk / Return Rank
XSHQ
XLG
XSHQ vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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 | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.38 | -0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.48 | 2.31 | -0.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.06 | 8.66 | -4.61 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XSHQ | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.88 | 2.15 | -1.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.28 | 0.87 | -0.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.92 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.37 | 0.62 | -0.26 |
Drawdowns
XSHQ vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XSHQ drawdown since its inception was -38.33%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XSHQ and XLG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XSHQ | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.33% | -52.39% | +14.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.27% | -12.41% | +2.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.34% | -20.70% | -6.64% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.34% | -28.02% | +0.68% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -30.46% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.76% | -1.44% | -0.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.35% | -7.64% | -1.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.75% | 3.30% | +0.45% |
Volatility
XSHQ vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF (XSHQ) has a higher volatility of 4.57% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 3.19%. This indicates that XSHQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XSHQ | XLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.57% | 3.19% | +1.38% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.66% | 9.80% | +1.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.43% | 13.33% | +4.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.23% | 18.68% | +2.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.13% | 18.84% | +4.29% |
XSHQ vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison
XSHQ has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
XSHQ vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison
XSHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, more than XLG's 0.60% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 0.60% | 0.64% | 0.72% | 0.97% | 1.34% | 0.94% | 1.25% | 1.58% | 2.00% | 1.85% | 2.00% | 2.09% |
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XSHQ and XLG have a correlation of 0.48, 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 XLG (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XSHQ dropped -38.33% vs XLG's -52.39%.
On 5-year performance, XLG leads with 16.24% vs 5.96% for XSHQ. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, XLG has performed better with a 16.24% return vs 5.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for XSHQ.
XSHQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.60% for XLG.
XSHQ is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. XSHQ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Quality Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for XSHQ and 0.20% for XLG.
XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 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.
Find the right allocation for XSHQ and XLG
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