FSGS vs. GRPZ
FSGS (First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF) and GRPZ (Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - FSGS tracks the SMID Growth Strength Index while GRPZ tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 GARP Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FSGS returned 4.81% vs 21.80% for GRPZ. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FSGS charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GRPZ.
Performance
FSGS vs. GRPZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FSGS achieves a 1.27% return, which is significantly lower than GRPZ's 10.84% return.
FSGS
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 0.83%
- YTD
- 1.27%
- 6M
- 0.20%
- 1Y
- 4.81%
- 3Y*
- 7.06%
- 5Y*
- 2.19%
- 10Y*
- —
GRPZ
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- -1.04%
- YTD
- 10.84%
- 6M
- 8.51%
- 1Y
- 21.80%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FSGS vs. GRPZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF | 1.27% | 2.41% | 5.94% |
GRPZ Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF | 10.84% | 3.09% | 4.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between FSGS and GRPZ is 0.85, 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 | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2024 | 0.88 |
The correlation between FSGS and GRPZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
FSGS vs. GRPZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FSGS
GRPZ
Industrials
Financial Services
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
-
Industrials
FSGS
GRPZ
Financial Services
FSGS
GRPZ
Technology
FSGS
GRPZ
Healthcare
FSGS
GRPZ
Consumer Cyclical
FSGS
GRPZ
Consumer Defensive
FSGS
GRPZ
Energy
FSGS
GRPZ
Communication Services
FSGS
GRPZ
Basic Materials
FSGS
GRPZ
Real Estate
FSGS
GRPZ
-
Utilities
FSGS
-
GRPZ
-
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
FSGS vs. GRPZ — Risk / Return Rank
FSGS
GRPZ
FSGS vs. GRPZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) and Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF (GRPZ). 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.
| FSGS | GRPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.22 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.43 | 2.30 | -1.87 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.21 | 6.59 | -5.37 |
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
| FSGS | GRPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 | 1.24 | -0.93 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.30 | 0.40 | -0.09 |
Drawdowns
FSGS vs. GRPZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FSGS drawdown since its inception was -43.26%, which is greater than GRPZ's maximum drawdown of -27.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSGS and GRPZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FSGS | GRPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.26% | -27.87% | -15.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.31% | -9.53% | -1.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.08% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.08% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.73% | -3.57% | -1.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.03% | -7.00% | -1.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.97% | 3.32% | +0.65% |
Volatility
FSGS vs. GRPZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) is 3.74%, while Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF (GRPZ) has a volatility of 4.72%. This indicates that FSGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GRPZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FSGS | GRPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.74% | 4.72% | -0.98% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.73% | 11.85% | -1.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.24% | 17.70% | -2.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.14% | 21.17% | -1.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.81% | 21.17% | +1.64% |
FSGS vs. GRPZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
FSGS has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than GRPZ's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
FSGS vs. GRPZ - Dividend Comparison
FSGS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GRPZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 2.71% | 2.29% | 1.95% | 1.35% | 1.32% | 1.77% | 2.13% | 1.15% |
GRPZ Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF | 0.91% | 0.97% | 0.73% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FSGS and GRPZ have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GRPZ has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to FSGS (3.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSGS dropped -43.26% vs GRPZ's -27.87%.
On 1-year performance, GRPZ leads with 21.80% vs 4.81% for FSGS. On fees, GRPZ is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FSGS has been the lower-risk option at 3.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GRPZ has performed better with a 21.80% return vs 4.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GRPZ is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FSGS.
GRPZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.00% for FSGS.
FSGS tracks SMID Growth Strength Index, while GRPZ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 GARP Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FSGS and 0.35% for GRPZ.
GRPZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 0.32), 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 FSGS and GRPZ
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