Screener
CZA vs XMHQ
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF
Key differences
- XMHQ costs 0.44% less per year.
- XMHQ is significantly larger than CZA — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, XMHQ has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| CZA | XMHQ | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.69% | 0.25% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $184M | $5.3B |
| Since | 2007 | 2006 |
| Dividend yield | 1.47% | 0.56% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +14.6% | +12.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | +14.2% | +17.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | +6.9% | +9.0% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.73 | 0.76 |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.79% | 15.57% |
| Max drawdown | -46.18% | -36.90% |
Similar to CZA and XMHQ
Explore further