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

Performance

FQAL vs. RPG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) 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, FQAL achieves a 6.05% return, which is significantly lower than RPG's 30.31% return.


FQAL

1D
-0.86%
1M
-0.99%
YTD
6.05%
6M
4.85%
1Y
19.02%
3Y*
18.84%
5Y*
11.74%
10Y*

RPG

1D
-4.60%
1M
5.48%
YTD
30.31%
6M
27.62%
1Y
38.51%
3Y*
27.72%
5Y*
11.59%
10Y*
15.14%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FQAL vs. RPG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FQAL
Fidelity Quality Factor ETF
6.05%16.93%21.92%24.20%-19.70%32.13%16.17%28.12%-4.39%23.03%
RPG
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF
30.31%13.41%28.23%8.04%-27.55%29.40%29.34%28.34%-4.53%26.20%

Correlation

The correlation between FQAL and RPG is 0.80, 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

0.80

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

0.84

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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2016

0.88

The correlation between FQAL and RPG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

FQAL vs. RPG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FQAL
RPG

Technology

37.7%
46.9%

Financial Services

11.6%
5.3%

Communication Services

10.0%
5.4%

Consumer Cyclical

9.2%
14.7%

Industrials

8.8%
14.0%

Healthcare

8.7%
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

4.3%
1.1%

Energy

3.5%
1.6%

Basic Materials

2.1%
1.2%

Real Estate

2.1%
1.0%

Utilities

2.0%
2.4%

Technology

FQAL
37.7%
RPG
46.9%

Financial Services

FQAL
11.6%
RPG
5.3%

Communication Services

FQAL
10.0%
RPG
5.4%

Consumer Cyclical

FQAL
9.2%
RPG
14.7%

Industrials

FQAL
8.8%
RPG
14.0%

Healthcare

FQAL
8.7%
RPG
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

FQAL
4.3%
RPG
1.1%

Energy

FQAL
3.5%
RPG
1.6%

Basic Materials

FQAL
2.1%
RPG
1.2%

Real Estate

FQAL
2.1%
RPG
1.0%

Utilities

FQAL
2.0%
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

FQAL vs. RPG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FQAL
FQAL Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
FQAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FQAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
FQAL Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
FQAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
FQAL Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank

RPG
RPG Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
RPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
RPG Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
RPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
RPG Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

FQAL vs. RPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) 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.


FQALRPGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.31

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.27

3.49

-1.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.13

13.16

-3.03

FQAL vs. RPG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FQAL Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is comparable to the RPG Sharpe Ratio of 1.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FQAL 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

FQAL vs. RPG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FQAL drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, smaller than the maximum RPG drawdown of -53.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FQAL and RPG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FQALRPGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.71%

-53.27%

+19.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.43%

-11.08%

+2.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.87%

-24.75%

+7.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.50%

-35.59%

+10.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.19%

-4.60%

+2.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.57%

-8.83%

+4.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.88%

2.93%

-1.05%

Volatility

FQAL vs. RPG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) is 3.75%, while Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) has a volatility of 11.10%. This indicates that FQAL 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


FQALRPGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.75%

11.10%

-7.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.06%

19.02%

-9.96%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.54%

22.09%

-10.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.23%

23.86%

-7.63%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.57%

22.90%

-5.33%

FQAL vs. RPG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FQAL has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than RPG's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

FQAL vs. RPG - Dividend Comparison

FQAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.19%, more than RPG's 0.15% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FQAL
Fidelity Quality Factor ETF
1.19%1.12%1.20%1.35%1.52%1.17%1.46%1.55%1.73%1.53%0.43%0.00%
RPG
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF
0.15%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


FQAL and RPG have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RPG has higher volatility (11.10%) compared to FQAL (3.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FQAL dropped -33.71% vs RPG's -53.27%.

On 5-year performance, FQAL leads with 11.74% vs 11.59% for RPG. On fees, FQAL is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, FQAL has been the lower-risk option at 3.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FQAL has performed better with a 11.74% return vs 11.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FQAL is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RPG.

FQAL has the higher dividend yield at 1.19%, compared with 0.15% for RPG.

FQAL tracks Fidelity U.S. Quality Factor Index, while RPG tracks S&P 500/Citigroup Pure Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FQAL and 0.35% for RPG.

RPG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 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 FQAL 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