PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IJT vs. RZG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IJT vs. RZG

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

IJT (iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Growth ETF) and RZG (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - IJT tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Growth Index while RZG tracks the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IJT returned 11.04%/yr vs 9.94%/yr for RZG. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. IJT charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RZG.

Performance

IJT vs. RZG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Growth ETF (IJT) 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, IJT achieves a 22.72% return, which is significantly lower than RZG's 26.29% return. Over the past 10 years, IJT has outperformed RZG with an annualized return of 11.04%, while RZG has yielded a comparatively lower 9.94% annualized return.

IJT

1D
-0.21%
1M
-1.81%
6M
17.16%
YTD
22.72%
1Y
32.44%
3Y*
13.98%
5Y*
6.52%
10Y*
11.04%
ALL TIME*
9.57%

RZG

1D
-0.65%
1M
-4.33%
6M
19.67%
YTD
26.29%
1Y
36.63%
3Y*
16.73%
5Y*
5.85%
10Y*
9.94%
ALL TIME*
9.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

IJT

iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Growth ETF
$37.02M$33.10M$30.37M

RZG

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF
$1.09M$1.58M$973.13K

IJT vs. RZG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IJT
iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Growth ETF		22.72%5.26%9.33%17.11%-21.32%22.37%19.22%20.98%-4.40%14.47%
RZG
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF		26.29%10.22%9.84%19.15%-29.00%21.01%17.76%14.25%-8.70%19.18%

Correlation

The correlation between IJT and RZG is 0.97 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.97

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.97

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.97

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2006

0.91

The correlation between IJT and RZG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

IJT vs. RZG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IJT
RZG

Industrials

19.9%
16.4%

Technology

16.8%
17.3%

Healthcare

15.1%
25.1%

Financial Services

14.7%
15.1%

Consumer Cyclical

11.4%
9.1%

Real Estate

7.2%
6.8%

Energy

4.5%
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
5.6%

Basic Materials

3.0%
0.4%

Communication Services

2.3%
1.7%

Utilities

1.7%
0.4%

Industrials

IJT
19.9%
RZG
16.4%

Technology

IJT
16.8%
RZG
17.3%

Healthcare

IJT
15.1%
RZG
25.1%

Financial Services

IJT
14.7%
RZG
15.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IJT
11.4%
RZG
9.1%

Real Estate

IJT
7.2%
RZG
6.8%

Energy

IJT
4.5%
RZG
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

IJT
3.5%
RZG
5.6%

Basic Materials

IJT
3.0%
RZG
0.4%

Communication Services

IJT
2.3%
RZG
1.7%

Utilities

IJT
1.7%
RZG
0.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Growth ETF

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF

Often compared with IJT:
IJT vs. IJRIJT vs. VBKIJT vs. SLYGIJT vs. ISCGIJT vs. IWMIJT vs. VIOGIJT vs. SCHA
Often compared with RZG:
RZG vs. VBKRZG vs. FDGRZG vs. QQQRZG vs. TNARZG vs. IWCRZG vs. ^GSPCRZG vs. SPSM

Return for Risk

IJT vs. RZG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
IJT
IJT Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
IJT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IJT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
IJT Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
IJT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
IJT Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
RZG
RZG Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
RZG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RZG Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
RZG Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
RZG Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
RZG Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IJT vs. RZG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Growth ETF (IJT) 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.

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.

IJTRZGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.71
1.81

-0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.55
2.72

-0.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.31

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.35

4.04

-0.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.32

12.57

-1.25

IJT vs. RZG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IJT Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is comparable to the RZG Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IJT 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...

Drawdowns

IJT vs. RZG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IJT drawdown since its inception was -57.61%, roughly equal to the maximum RZG drawdown of -58.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IJT and RZG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IJTRZGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-57.61%

-58.52%

+0.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.08%

-8.63%

-0.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.41%

-25.73%

-1.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.24%

-38.33%

+9.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.03%

-54.02%

+11.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.30%

-5.84%

+2.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.25%

-12.05%

+1.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.68%

2.77%

-0.09%

Volatility

IJT vs. RZG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Growth ETF (IJT) is 4.09%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that IJT 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

IJTRZGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.09%

5.75%

-1.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.94%

14.74%

-1.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.87%

19.27%

-1.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.48%

23.03%

-1.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.00%

24.65%

-1.65%

IJT vs. RZG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IJT has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than RZG's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IJT vs. RZG - Dividend Comparison

IJT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.70%, more than RZG's 0.45% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IJT
iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Growth ETF		0.70%0.91%1.06%1.02%1.08%0.63%0.68%0.92%0.92%0.86%1.03%1.14%
RZG
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF		0.45%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 0.97, IJT 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 (5.75%) compared to IJT (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IJT dropped -57.61% vs RZG's -58.52%.

On 10-year performance, IJT leads with 11.04% vs 9.94% for RZG. On fees, IJT is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IJT 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 10-year period, IJT has performed better with a 11.04% return vs 9.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IJT is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RZG.

IJT has the higher dividend yield at 0.70%, compared with 0.45% for RZG.

IJT tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Growth Index, while RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IJT and 0.35% for RZG.

RZG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 1.71), 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 IJT 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