ILCG vs. RWK

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) and RWK (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ILCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross, while RWK is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ILCG returned 17.83%/yr vs 12.66%/yr for RWK. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ILCG charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RWK.

Performance

ILCG vs. RWK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILCG achieves a 10.48% return, which is significantly lower than RWK's 12.60% return. Over the past 10 years, ILCG has outperformed RWK with an annualized return of 17.83%, while RWK has yielded a comparatively lower 12.66% annualized return.

ILCG

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: 0.01%
• YTD: 10.48%
• 6M: 9.79%
• 1Y: 24.11%
• 3Y*: 25.09%
• 5Y*: 14.03%
• 10Y*: 17.83%

RWK

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: 1.42%
• YTD: 12.60%
• 6M: 12.51%
• 1Y: 26.47%
• 3Y*: 16.89%
• 5Y*: 10.58%
• 10Y*: 12.66%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILCG vs. RWK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	10.48%	16.71%	32.82%	40.41%	-31.75%	24.33%	38.56%	33.22%	2.06%	30.57%
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF	12.60%	10.27%	11.94%	23.76%	-8.19%	34.31%	11.06%	28.20%	-14.65%	13.39%

Correlation

The correlation between ILCG and RWK is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2008	0.71

The correlation between ILCG and RWK shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ILCG vs. RWK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ILCG	RWK
Technology	49.8%	14.0%
Communication Services	14.5%	0.7%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	20.7%
Industrials	8.3%	21.8%
Financial Services	6.0%	13.1%
Healthcare	5.3%	4.0%
Consumer Defensive	1.6%	11.3%
Real Estate	1.4%	2.8%
Basic Materials	1.1%	4.7%
Utilities	0.8%	1.6%
Energy	0.5%	5.3%

Return for Risk

ILCG vs. RWK — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILCG

ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 41
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 45
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 38

RWK

RWK Risk / Return Rank: 52
RWK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
RWK Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
RWK Omega Ratio Rank: 49
RWK Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
RWK Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

ILCG vs. RWK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK). 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.

	ILCG	RWK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.60	-0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.94	2.41	-0.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.28	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.55	2.39	-0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.43	7.67	-2.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ILCG vs. RWK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the RWK Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILCG and RWK, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ILCG	RWK	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.44	1.60	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64	0.50	+0.14
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.83	0.55	+0.28
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.58	0.48	+0.10

Drawdowns

ILCG vs. RWK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILCG drawdown since its inception was -52.98%, smaller than the maximum RWK drawdown of -56.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILCG and RWK.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILCG	RWK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.98%	-56.49%	+3.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.65%	-11.14%	-4.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.10%	-24.58%	+1.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.38%	-24.58%	-10.80%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.38%	-46.20%	+10.82%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.48%	-0.99%	-3.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.22%	-7.55%	-0.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.45%	3.46%	+0.99%

Volatility

ILCG vs. RWK - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a higher volatility of 6.01% compared to Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) at 4.08%. This indicates that ILCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ILCG	RWK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.01%	4.08%	+1.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.55%	11.88%	+1.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.85%	16.67%	+0.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.08%	21.13%	+0.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.58%	22.95%	-1.37%

ILCG vs. RWK - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILCG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than RWK's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILCG vs. RWK - Dividend Comparison

ILCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, less than RWK's 1.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	0.42%	0.47%	0.50%	0.69%	0.75%	0.34%	0.28%	0.54%	0.81%	0.89%	0.95%	0.99%
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF	1.13%	1.25%	1.11%	1.05%	1.18%	0.85%	0.96%	1.09%	1.22%	0.99%	1.30%	0.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ILCG and RWK in my portfolio?

ILCG and RWK have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ILCG or RWK?

ILCG has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to RWK (4.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILCG dropped -52.98% vs RWK's -56.49%.

Which ETF is better, ILCG or RWK?

On 10-year performance, ILCG leads with 17.83% vs 12.66% for RWK. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, RWK has been the lower-risk option at 4.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ILCG or RWK?

Over the 10-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 17.83% return vs 12.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ILCG or RWK?

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ILCG or RWK?

RWK has the higher dividend yield at 1.13%, compared with 0.42% for ILCG.

What is the main difference between ILCG and RWK?

ILCG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while RWK is Small Cap Blend Equities. ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross, while RWK tracks S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for ILCG and 0.39% for RWK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 1.44), 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.