CAFG vs. RZG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CAFG (Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and RZG (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - CAFG tracks the Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index - Benchmark TR Gross while RZG tracks the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CAFG returned 15.59%/yr vs 18.48%/yr for RZG. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CAFG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RZG.

Performance

CAFG vs. RZG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAFG achieves a 27.15% return, which is significantly higher than RZG's 20.35% return.

CAFG

• 1D: 1.09%
• 1M: 2.66%
• YTD: 27.15%
• 6M: 25.89%
• 1Y: 32.91%
• 3Y*: 15.59%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RZG

• 1D: 1.87%
• 1M: 0.23%
• YTD: 20.35%
• 6M: 18.94%
• 1Y: 33.26%
• 3Y*: 18.48%
• 5Y*: 5.24%
• 10Y*: 9.73%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CAFG vs. RZG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CAFG Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	27.15%	0.17%	6.95%	20.44%
RZG Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF	20.35%	10.22%	9.84%	21.40%

Correlation

The correlation between CAFG and RZG is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2023	0.92

The correlation between CAFG and RZG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

CAFG vs. RZG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CAFG	RZG
Technology	30.8%	16.8%
Industrials	19.3%	18.2%
Healthcare	18.8%	22.0%
Energy	13.4%	3.0%
Consumer Cyclical	7.2%	8.8%
Communication Services	3.7%	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	5.9%
Basic Materials	2.4%	0.4%
Utilities	1.4%	0.4%
Financial Services	-	15.0%
Real Estate	-	7.6%

Return for Risk

CAFG vs. RZG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CAFG

CAFG Risk / Return Rank: 64
CAFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
CAFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
CAFG Omega Ratio Rank: 53
CAFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
CAFG Martin Ratio Rank: 71

RZG

RZG Risk / Return Rank: 61
RZG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
RZG Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
RZG Omega Ratio Rank: 50
RZG Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
RZG Martin Ratio Rank: 70

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CAFG vs. RZG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	CAFG	RZG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	1.79	+0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.72	2.65	+0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.31	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.06	3.87	+0.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.23	12.94	+0.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CAFG vs. RZG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the RZG Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAFG and RZG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CAFG	RZG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	1.79	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.23	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.40	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.89	0.38	+0.52

Drawdowns

CAFG vs. RZG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAFG drawdown since its inception was -23.66%, smaller than the maximum RZG drawdown of -58.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAFG and RZG.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAFG	RZG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.66%	-58.52%	+34.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.13%	-8.63%	+0.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.66%	-25.73%	+2.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-38.33%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-54.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.09%	+0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.52%	-12.12%	+6.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.49%	2.58%	-0.09%

Volatility

CAFG vs. RZG - Volatility Comparison

Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) have volatilities of 4.61% and 4.80%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CAFG	RZG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.61%	4.80%	-0.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.78%	13.68%	-0.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.40%	18.63%	-1.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.57%	22.99%	-3.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.57%	24.65%	-5.08%

CAFG vs. RZG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAFG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than RZG's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAFG vs. RZG - Dividend Comparison

CAFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%, less than RZG's 0.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CAFG Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.34%	0.35%	0.36%	0.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RZG Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF	0.41%	0.37%	0.95%	1.43%	1.59%	0.22%	0.49%	0.70%	0.46%	0.44%	0.65%	0.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAFG and RZG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, CAFG and RZG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CAFG or RZG?

RZG has higher volatility (4.80%) compared to CAFG (4.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAFG dropped -23.66% vs RZG's -58.52%.

Which ETF is better, CAFG or RZG?

On 3-year performance, RZG leads with 18.48% vs 15.59% for CAFG. On fees, RZG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CAFG has been the lower-risk option at 4.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAFG or RZG?

Over the 3-year period, RZG has performed better with a 18.48% return vs 15.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAFG or RZG?

RZG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for CAFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CAFG or RZG?

RZG has the higher dividend yield at 0.41%, compared with 0.34% for CAFG.

What is the main difference between CAFG and RZG?

CAFG tracks Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for CAFG and 0.35% for RZG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 1.79), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.