Screener
RWK vs XMLV
Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF
Key differences
- XMLV costs 0.14% less per year.
- Over the last 3 years, RWK has delivered higher annualized returns.
- RWK has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| RWK | XMLV | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.39% | 0.25% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $1.2B | $750M |
| Since | 2008 | 2013 |
| Dividend yield | 1.16% | 2.80% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +26.0% | +10.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +17.5% | +11.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | +9.7% | +6.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.76 | 0.63 |
| Volatility 1Y | 16.84% | 10.30% |
| Max drawdown | -46.20% | -39.86% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to RWK and XMLV
Explore further