Screener
TAN vs OMFS
Invesco Solar ETF vs Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Key differences
- OMFS costs 0.31% less per year.
- TAN is significantly larger than OMFS — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- TAN follows a index tracking strategy; OMFS uses index enhanced.
- Over the last 3 years, OMFS has delivered higher annualized returns.
- TAN has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| TAN | OMFS | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.70% | 0.39% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $1.6B | $275M |
| Since | 2008 | 2017 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.93% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index enhanced |
| CAGR 1Y | +122.2% | +33.5% |
| CAGR 3Y | +0.4% | +15.9% |
| CAGR 5Y | -1.1% | +6.8% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.11 | 0.65 |
| Volatility 1Y | 36.88% | 17.69% |
| Max drawdown | -78.53% | -42.50% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to TAN and OMFS
Explore further