FLQS vs OMFS
Franklin US Small Cap Multifactor Index ETF vs Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Which is better, FLQS or OMFS?
Each has led over a different period.
FLQS has a lower expense ratio. FLQS led over 5Y, OMFS over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. FLQS is less concentrated, with 9.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 12.0%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FLQS | OMFS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35%Best | 0.39% |
| AUM | $50M | $264M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.57% | 1.30% |
| Holdings | 497 | 2,228 |
| YTD Return | +9.82%Best | +8.89% |
| 1Y Return | +9.87% | +10.32%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.65% | +14.55%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.25%Best | +4.67% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.1%Best | 21.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -42.2%Best | -42.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,915Best | $12,564 |
| Top 10 Weight | 9.7%Best | 12.0% |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 26, 2017 | Nov 8, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 17, 2017 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.9 years).
FLQS vs OMFS growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 8.9 years both funds cover.
FLQS vs OMFS Performance
Franklin US Small Cap Multifactor Index ETF (FLQS) is an ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FLQS returned +9.87% while OMFS returned +10.32%. Year to date, FLQS is up 9.82% versus a gain of 8.89% for OMFS.
Over three years, FLQS compounded at +12.65% per year against +14.55% for OMFS; over five years the annualized figures are +5.25% and +4.67% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, OMFS has the edge at +9.11% annualized vs +8.34%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
OMFS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.3% compared with 19.1% for FLQS. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -42.2% for FLQS and -42.5% for OMFS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLQS charges 0.35% per year while OMFS charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $39 annually, a gap of $4 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLQS currently yields 1.57% against 1.30% for OMFS.
Holdings Overlap
76.9% of FLQS's money is in holdings OMFS also owns. 33.4% of OMFS's money is in holdings FLQS also owns.
Most of FLQS is already inside OMFS. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
298 positions in common, counted across the 491 positions we hold weights for in FLQS and 933 in OMFS, against full books of 497 and 2,228.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 600 positions for OMFS that do not appear in our book for FLQS (61.5% of the fund), and 178 for FLQS that do not appear in OMFS (21.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FLQS | Weight in OMFS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTRECaretrust Reit Inc Reit Usd.01 | 0.85% | 1.64% | 0.79% |
| FCFSFirstcash Inc | 0.91% | 1.53% | 0.62% |
| IDCCInterdigital Inc | 1.00% | 0.64% | 0.36% |
| ESNTEssent Group Ltd. | 0.93% | 0.68% | 0.25% |
| ALKS:IEAlkermes Plc. Ordinary Shares | 0.94% | 0.64% | 0.30% |
| YOUClear Secure Inc -Class A | 0.64% | 0.78% | 0.14% |
| QLYSQualys Inc | 1.04% | 0.31% | 0.73% |
| ANFAbercrombie & Fitch Co. Class A | 1.00% | 0.30% | 0.70% |
| VCTRVictory Receivables Corp | 0.31% | 0.92% | 0.61% |
| MOG.AMoog Inccommon Stock | 1.04% | 0.13% | 0.91% |
76.9% of FLQS is already inside OMFS.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FLQS or OMFS?
FLQS has an expense ratio of 0.35% while OMFS charges 0.39%. FLQS is the cheaper option, by $4 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FLQS or OMFS?
Over the past year FLQS returned +9.87% vs +10.32% for OMFS, so OMFS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), FLQS annualized +8.34% vs +9.11% for OMFS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FLQS or OMFS?
OMFS has been the more volatile fund at 21.3% annualized versus 19.1% for FLQS. Worst drawdown: FLQS -42.2% vs OMFS -42.5%.
Should I hold both FLQS and OMFS?
FLQS and OMFS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FLQS and OMFS?
76.9% of FLQS's money is in holdings OMFS also owns. 33.4% of OMFS's is in holdings FLQS also owns. They hold 298 positions in common, counted across the 491 positions we hold weights for in FLQS and 933 in OMFS.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLQS or OMFS?
FLQS yields 1.57% while OMFS yields 1.30%, so FLQS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is OMFS better than FLQS?
FLQS has a lower expense ratio. FLQS led over 5Y, OMFS over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. FLQS is less concentrated, with 9.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 12.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.