PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CZA vs. IJH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CZA vs. IJH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF (IJH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CZA achieves a 6.23% return, which is significantly lower than IJH's 14.24% return. Over the past 10 years, CZA has underperformed IJH with an annualized return of 10.13%, while IJH has yielded a comparatively higher 11.29% annualized return.


CZA

1D
0.43%
1M
0.98%
YTD
6.23%
6M
7.63%
1Y
14.36%
3Y*
12.64%
5Y*
6.76%
10Y*
10.13%

IJH

1D
0.91%
1M
3.31%
YTD
14.24%
6M
15.27%
1Y
27.17%
3Y*
16.14%
5Y*
8.32%
10Y*
11.29%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CZA vs. IJH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CZA
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF
6.23%8.31%12.14%7.00%-5.91%27.42%0.35%32.27%-8.89%21.90%
IJH
iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF
14.24%7.42%13.92%16.40%-13.11%24.72%13.60%26.10%-11.19%16.26%

Correlation

The correlation between CZA and IJH is 0.89, 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

0.89

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.90

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2007

0.82

The correlation between CZA and IJH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

CZA vs. IJH - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CZA
IJH

Financial Services

23.8%
14.4%

Industrials

16.0%
25.0%

Healthcare

12.6%
8.6%

Utilities

10.6%
3.1%

Real Estate

10.5%
7.5%

Technology

10.5%
15.7%

Consumer Cyclical

6.2%
10.7%

Basic Materials

4.2%
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
3.8%

Energy

0.8%
5.5%

Communication Services

-

1.0%

Financial Services

CZA
23.8%
IJH
14.4%

Industrials

CZA
16.0%
IJH
25.0%

Healthcare

CZA
12.6%
IJH
8.6%

Utilities

CZA
10.6%
IJH
3.1%

Real Estate

CZA
10.5%
IJH
7.5%

Technology

CZA
10.5%
IJH
15.7%

Consumer Cyclical

CZA
6.2%
IJH
10.7%

Basic Materials

CZA
4.2%
IJH
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

CZA
2.9%
IJH
3.8%

Energy

CZA
0.8%
IJH
5.5%

Communication Services

CZA

-

IJH
1.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

CZA vs. IJH — Risk / Return Rank

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

CZA
CZA Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
CZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
CZA Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
CZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
CZA Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

IJH
IJH Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
IJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
IJH Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
IJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
IJH Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CZA vs. IJH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF (IJH). 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.


CZAIJHDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.13

1.76

-0.63

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.71

2.55

-0.84

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.31

-0.11

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.50

3.06

-1.56

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

5.74

11.22

-5.48

CZA vs. IJH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CZA Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is lower than the IJH Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CZA and IJH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CZAIJHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.13

1.76

-0.63

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

0.42

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.53

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.48

0.46

+0.01

Drawdowns

CZA vs. IJH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CZA drawdown since its inception was -53.20%, roughly equal to the maximum IJH drawdown of -55.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZA and IJH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CZAIJHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-53.20%

-55.07%

+1.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.21%

-8.83%

-0.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

-24.10%

+5.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.92%

-24.10%

+5.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.18%

-42.18%

-4.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.54%

0.00%

-0.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.89%

-7.57%

+0.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.41%

2.41%

0.00%

Volatility

CZA vs. IJH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) is 3.35%, while iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF (IJH) has a volatility of 4.44%. This indicates that CZA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CZAIJHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.35%

4.44%

-1.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.32%

11.34%

-2.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.79%

15.54%

-2.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.14%

19.74%

-3.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.28%

21.18%

-1.90%

CZA vs. IJH - Expense Ratio Comparison

CZA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than IJH's 0.05% expense ratio.


Dividends

CZA vs. IJH - Dividend Comparison

CZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, more than IJH's 1.18% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CZA
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF
1.47%1.56%1.27%1.36%1.71%0.89%1.42%1.40%1.27%1.10%1.87%1.37%
IJH
iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF
1.18%1.36%1.33%1.46%1.68%1.18%1.28%1.63%1.72%1.19%1.60%1.56%

Frequently Asked Questions


CZA and IJH have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IJH has higher volatility (4.44%) compared to CZA (3.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CZA dropped -53.20% vs IJH's -55.07%.

On 10-year performance, IJH leads with 11.29% vs 10.13% for CZA. On fees, IJH is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, CZA has been the lower-risk option at 3.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IJH has performed better with a 11.29% return vs 10.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IJH is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CZA.

CZA has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 1.18% for IJH.

CZA tracks Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index, while IJH tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CZA and 0.05% for IJH.

IJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 1.13), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CZA and IJH

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer