FSGS vs. RWJ
FSGS (First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF) and RWJ (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FSGS is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the SMID Growth Strength Index, while RWJ is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FSGS returned 2.54%/yr vs 8.58%/yr for RWJ. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FSGS charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RWJ.
Performance
FSGS vs. RWJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FSGS achieves a 1.66% return, which is significantly lower than RWJ's 19.01% return.
FSGS
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 1.66%
- 6M
- -0.28%
- 1Y
- 6.33%
- 3Y*
- 7.51%
- 5Y*
- 2.54%
- 10Y*
- —
RWJ
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 4.67%
- YTD
- 19.01%
- 6M
- 17.54%
- 1Y
- 37.61%
- 3Y*
- 18.15%
- 5Y*
- 8.58%
- 10Y*
- 13.63%
FSGS vs. RWJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF | 1.66% | 2.41% | 6.38% | 15.98% | -13.17% | 25.56% | 10.26% | 21.31% | -11.92% | 10.39% |
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF | 19.01% | 7.75% | 11.81% | 16.21% | -10.97% | 52.82% | 20.83% | 20.29% | -16.95% | 10.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between FSGS and RWJ is 0.84, 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 | 0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2017 | 0.84 |
The correlation between FSGS and RWJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
FSGS vs. RWJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FSGS
RWJ
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Utilities
-
Financial Services
FSGS
RWJ
Industrials
FSGS
RWJ
Technology
FSGS
RWJ
Healthcare
FSGS
RWJ
Consumer Cyclical
FSGS
RWJ
Consumer Defensive
FSGS
RWJ
Energy
FSGS
RWJ
Communication Services
FSGS
RWJ
Basic Materials
FSGS
RWJ
Real Estate
FSGS
RWJ
Utilities
FSGS
-
RWJ
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. RWJ — Risk / Return Rank
FSGS
RWJ
FSGS vs. RWJ - 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 Revenue ETF (RWJ). 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.
| FSGS | RWJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.53 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.34 | -0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.56 | 3.34 | -2.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.58 | 10.72 | -9.14 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FSGS vs. RWJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FSGS drawdown since its inception was -43.26%, smaller than the maximum RWJ drawdown of -55.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSGS and RWJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FSGS | RWJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.26% | -55.97% | +12.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.31% | -11.31% | 0.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.08% | -29.29% | +5.21% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.08% | -29.29% | +5.21% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -51.33% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.36% | -1.68% | -2.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.00% | -9.21% | +1.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.02% | 3.52% | +0.50% |
Volatility
FSGS vs. RWJ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) is 3.55%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) has a volatility of 4.65%. This indicates that FSGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RWJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FSGS | RWJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.55% | 4.65% | -1.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.87% | 12.61% | -1.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.24% | 19.39% | -4.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.08% | 23.66% | -3.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.76% | 26.12% | -3.36% |
FSGS vs. RWJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
FSGS has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RWJ's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
FSGS vs. RWJ - Dividend Comparison
FSGS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RWJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF | 1.05% | 1.11% | 1.15% | 1.34% | 1.02% | 0.61% | 0.89% | 1.22% | 1.44% | 1.11% | 0.60% | 0.74% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FSGS and RWJ have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RWJ has higher volatility (4.65%) compared to FSGS (3.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSGS dropped -43.26% vs RWJ's -55.97%.
On 5-year performance, RWJ leads with 8.58% vs 2.54% for FSGS. On fees, RWJ is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, FSGS has been the lower-risk option at 3.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, RWJ has performed better with a 8.58% return vs 2.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RWJ is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FSGS.
RWJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.05%, compared with 0.00% for FSGS.
FSGS is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while RWJ is Small Cap Value Equities. FSGS tracks SMID Growth Strength Index, while RWJ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FSGS and 0.39% for RWJ.
RWJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 0.42), 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 RWJ
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