Screener
ROE vs XMHQ
Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF
Key differences
- XMHQ costs 0.24% less per year.
- XMHQ is significantly larger than ROE — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- ROE follows a active selection strategy; XMHQ uses index tracking.
- XMHQ has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| ROE | XMHQ | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.49% | 0.25% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $239M | $5.2B |
| Since | 2023 | 2006 |
| Dividend yield | 1.01% | 0.58% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +37.5% | +14.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +16.2% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +9.2% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.71 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.02% | 15.63% |
| Max drawdown | -19.10% | -36.90% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to ROE and XMHQ
Explore further