PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMOT vs. RPG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMOT vs. RPG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust S&P 500 Economic Moat ETF (EMOT) and Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMOT achieves a 9.61% return, which is significantly lower than RPG's 36.60% return.


EMOT

1D
-1.12%
1M
-0.06%
YTD
9.61%
6M
8.78%
1Y
18.68%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

RPG

1D
1.57%
1M
10.57%
YTD
36.60%
6M
33.46%
1Y
47.03%
3Y*
29.74%
5Y*
12.84%
10Y*
15.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMOT vs. RPG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
EMOT
First Trust S&P 500 Economic Moat ETF
9.61%14.17%5.53%
RPG
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF
36.60%13.41%11.63%

Correlation

The correlation between EMOT and RPG is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2024

0.78

The correlation between EMOT and RPG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMOT vs. RPG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMOT
RPG

Technology

41.6%
46.9%

Consumer Cyclical

18.0%
14.7%

Consumer Defensive

15.9%
1.1%

Healthcare

9.4%
6.4%

Financial Services

5.1%
5.3%

Communication Services

3.9%
5.4%

Industrials

3.6%
14.0%

Energy

2.4%
1.6%

Basic Materials

-

1.2%

Real Estate

-

1.0%

Utilities

-

2.4%

Technology

EMOT
41.6%
RPG
46.9%

Consumer Cyclical

EMOT
18.0%
RPG
14.7%

Consumer Defensive

EMOT
15.9%
RPG
1.1%

Healthcare

EMOT
9.4%
RPG
6.4%

Financial Services

EMOT
5.1%
RPG
5.3%

Communication Services

EMOT
3.9%
RPG
5.4%

Industrials

EMOT
3.6%
RPG
14.0%

Energy

EMOT
2.4%
RPG
1.6%

Basic Materials

EMOT

-

RPG
1.2%

Real Estate

EMOT

-

RPG
1.0%

Utilities

EMOT

-

RPG
2.4%

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

EMOT vs. RPG — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMOT
EMOT Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
EMOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMOT Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
EMOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMOT Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank

RPG
RPG Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
RPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
RPG Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
RPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
RPG Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

EMOT vs. RPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust S&P 500 Economic Moat ETF (EMOT) and Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


EMOTRPGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.38

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.04

4.27

-2.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.00

16.15

-8.15

EMOT vs. RPG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMOT Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is comparable to the RPG Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMOT and RPG, 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...

Drawdowns

EMOT vs. RPG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMOT drawdown since its inception was -16.41%, smaller than the maximum RPG drawdown of -53.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMOT and RPG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMOTRPGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.41%

-53.27%

+36.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.19%

-11.08%

+1.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.28%

0.00%

-2.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.06%

-8.83%

+6.77%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.34%

2.92%

-0.58%

Volatility

EMOT vs. RPG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust S&P 500 Economic Moat ETF (EMOT) is 4.01%, while Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) has a volatility of 9.89%. This indicates that EMOT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RPG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMOTRPGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.01%

9.89%

-5.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.00%

18.39%

-9.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.73%

21.61%

-9.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.95%

23.77%

-8.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.95%

22.88%

-7.93%

EMOT vs. RPG - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMOT has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RPG's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMOT vs. RPG - Dividend Comparison

EMOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%, more than RPG's 0.19% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMOT
First Trust S&P 500 Economic Moat ETF
1.08%0.84%0.37%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RPG
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF
0.19%0.24%0.25%1.44%0.74%0.00%0.46%0.83%0.47%0.56%0.43%0.73%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMOT and RPG have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RPG has higher volatility (9.89%) compared to EMOT (4.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMOT dropped -16.41% vs RPG's -53.27%.

On 1-year performance, RPG leads with 47.03% vs 18.68% for EMOT. On fees, RPG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, EMOT has been the lower-risk option at 4.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, RPG has performed better with a 47.03% return vs 18.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RPG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for EMOT.

EMOT has the higher dividend yield at 1.08%, compared with 0.19% for RPG.

EMOT is categorized as S&P 500, while RPG is Large Cap Growth Equities. EMOT tracks S&P 500 Economic Moat Index, while RPG tracks S&P 500/Citigroup Pure Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for EMOT and 0.35% for RPG.

RPG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 1.60), 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 EMOT and RPG

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