PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESML vs. RZG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ESML vs. RZG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF (ESML) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESML achieves a 16.26% return, which is significantly lower than RZG's 18.15% return.


ESML

1D
-0.47%
1M
3.86%
YTD
16.26%
6M
15.99%
1Y
34.21%
3Y*
17.27%
5Y*
7.18%
10Y*

RZG

1D
-0.14%
1M
-0.10%
YTD
18.15%
6M
16.98%
1Y
30.70%
3Y*
17.12%
5Y*
4.85%
10Y*
9.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ESML vs. RZG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
ESML
iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF
16.26%10.62%12.01%17.27%-17.28%19.28%19.56%29.12%-10.89%
RZG
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF
18.15%10.22%9.84%19.15%-29.00%21.01%17.76%14.25%-10.76%

Correlation

The correlation between ESML and RZG is 0.92, 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

0.92

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

0.93

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

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2018

0.93

The correlation between ESML and RZG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

ESML vs. RZG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ESML
RZG

Industrials

19.3%
18.2%

Technology

17.5%
16.8%

Financial Services

14.4%
15.0%

Healthcare

12.6%
22.0%

Consumer Cyclical

11.3%
8.8%

Real Estate

6.5%
7.6%

Energy

5.9%
3.0%

Basic Materials

3.9%
0.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.7%
5.9%

Utilities

2.7%
0.4%

Communication Services

2.2%
1.9%

Industrials

ESML
19.3%
RZG
18.2%

Technology

ESML
17.5%
RZG
16.8%

Financial Services

ESML
14.4%
RZG
15.0%

Healthcare

ESML
12.6%
RZG
22.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ESML
11.3%
RZG
8.8%

Real Estate

ESML
6.5%
RZG
7.6%

Energy

ESML
5.9%
RZG
3.0%

Basic Materials

ESML
3.9%
RZG
0.4%

Consumer Defensive

ESML
3.7%
RZG
5.9%

Utilities

ESML
2.7%
RZG
0.4%

Communication Services

ESML
2.2%
RZG
1.9%

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

ESML vs. RZG — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESML
ESML Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
ESML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESML Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESML Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
ESML Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESML Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

RZG
RZG Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
RZG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RZG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
RZG Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
RZG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
RZG Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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.

ESML vs. RZG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF (ESML) 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.


ESMLRZGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.41

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.29

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.80

3.58

+0.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.00

11.94

+2.05

ESML vs. RZG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESML Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is comparable to the RZG Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESML 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ESMLRZGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.07

1.66

+0.41

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.34

0.21

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

0.37

+0.09

Drawdowns

ESML vs. RZG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESML drawdown since its inception was -41.97%, smaller than the maximum RZG drawdown of -58.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESML and RZG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ESMLRZGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.97%

-58.52%

+16.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.04%

-8.63%

-0.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.68%

-25.73%

-0.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.61%

-38.33%

+9.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-54.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.47%

-1.92%

+1.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.97%

-12.13%

+3.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.45%

2.58%

-0.13%

Volatility

ESML vs. RZG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF (ESML) is 4.25%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) has a volatility of 4.68%. This indicates that ESML experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RZG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ESMLRZGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.25%

4.68%

-0.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.67%

13.57%

-1.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.66%

18.57%

-1.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.23%

22.97%

-1.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.40%

24.64%

-1.24%

ESML vs. RZG - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESML has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than RZG's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

ESML vs. RZG - Dividend Comparison

ESML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, more than RZG's 0.42% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ESML
iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF
0.95%1.08%1.22%1.31%1.46%0.94%0.99%1.10%1.07%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RZG
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF
0.42%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


With a correlation of 0.92, ESML 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.

RZG has higher volatility (4.68%) compared to ESML (4.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ESML dropped -41.97% vs RZG's -58.52%.

On 5-year performance, ESML leads with 7.18% vs 4.85% for RZG. On fees, ESML is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, ESML has been the lower-risk option at 4.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ESML has performed better with a 7.18% return vs 4.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ESML is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RZG.

ESML has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.42% for RZG.

ESML tracks MSCI USA Small Cap Extended ESG Focus Index, while RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for ESML and 0.35% for RZG.

ESML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.66), 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 ESML and RZG

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