FLQS vs. RZG
FLQS (Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF) and RZG (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - FLQS tracks the LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity Index while RZG tracks the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLQS returned 5.27%/yr vs 4.85%/yr for RZG. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.
Performance
FLQS vs. RZG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLQS achieves a 6.14% return, which is significantly lower than RZG's 18.15% return.
FLQS
- 1D
- -0.81%
- 1M
- 0.12%
- YTD
- 6.14%
- 6M
- 5.99%
- 1Y
- 13.84%
- 3Y*
- 11.59%
- 5Y*
- 5.27%
- 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%
FLQS vs. RZG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLQS Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF | 6.14% | 5.04% | 8.34% | 21.28% | -16.88% | 26.58% | 10.51% | 18.34% | -5.86% | 7.41% |
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% | -8.70% | 12.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLQS 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 | 0.93 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 1, 2017 | 0.85 |
The correlation between FLQS and RZG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.
FLQS vs. RZG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FLQS
RZG
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Utilities
Energy
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Technology
FLQS
RZG
Industrials
FLQS
RZG
Consumer Cyclical
FLQS
RZG
Financial Services
FLQS
RZG
Healthcare
FLQS
RZG
Consumer Defensive
FLQS
RZG
Real Estate
FLQS
RZG
Utilities
FLQS
RZG
Energy
FLQS
RZG
Basic Materials
FLQS
RZG
Communication Services
FLQS
RZG
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
FLQS vs. RZG — Risk / Return Rank
FLQS
RZG
FLQS vs. RZG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS) 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.
| FLQS | RZG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.75 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.29 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.54 | 3.58 | -2.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.55 | 11.94 | -7.40 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FLQS | RZG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 | 1.66 | -0.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.28 | 0.21 | +0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.39 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.38 | 0.37 | 0.00 |
Drawdowns
FLQS vs. RZG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLQS drawdown since its inception was -42.16%, smaller than the maximum RZG drawdown of -58.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLQS and RZG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLQS | RZG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.16% | -58.52% | +16.36% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.00% | -8.63% | -0.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.12% | -25.73% | +2.61% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.05% | -38.33% | +10.28% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -54.02% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.33% | -1.92% | +0.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.02% | -12.13% | +4.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.05% | 2.58% | +0.47% |
Volatility
FLQS vs. RZG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS) is 4.09%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) has a volatility of 4.68%. This indicates that FLQS 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
| FLQS | RZG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.09% | 4.68% | -0.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.26% | 13.57% | -3.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.22% | 18.57% | -3.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.24% | 22.97% | -3.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.68% | 24.64% | -2.96% |
FLQS vs. RZG - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both FLQS and RZG have an expense ratio of 0.35%.
Dividends
FLQS vs. RZG - Dividend Comparison
FLQS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than RZG's 0.42% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLQS Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF | 1.35% | 1.16% | 1.29% | 1.75% | 1.40% | 0.95% | 1.20% | 1.41% | 1.27% | 1.02% | 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 0.91, FLQS 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 FLQS (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLQS dropped -42.16% vs RZG's -58.52%.
On 5-year performance, FLQS leads with 5.27% vs 4.85% for RZG. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, FLQS has been the lower-risk option at 4.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLQS has performed better with a 5.27% return vs 4.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLQS and RZG have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.
FLQS has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.42% for RZG.
FLQS tracks LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity Index, while RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Invesco.
RZG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 0.91), 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.
Find the right allocation for FLQS 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