MID vs. RFG
MID (American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF) and RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MID is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by American Century, while RFG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. MID is actively managed, while RFG is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MID returned 6.25%/yr vs 8.63%/yr for RFG. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MID charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RFG.
Performance
MID vs. RFG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MID achieves a 5.47% return, which is significantly lower than RFG's 22.14% return.
MID
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- 3.85%
- YTD
- 5.47%
- 6M
- 2.66%
- 1Y
- 6.76%
- 3Y*
- 14.41%
- 5Y*
- 6.25%
- 10Y*
- —
RFG
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- 7.30%
- YTD
- 22.14%
- 6M
- 21.89%
- 1Y
- 32.96%
- 3Y*
- 20.57%
- 5Y*
- 8.63%
- 10Y*
- 10.49%
MID vs. RFG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MID American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF | 5.47% | 8.22% | 19.40% | 22.20% | -27.44% | 10.39% | 29.63% |
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 22.14% | 8.80% | 17.80% | 16.42% | -21.70% | 13.81% | 30.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between MID and RFG is 0.83, 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 | 0.83 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2020 | 0.86 |
The correlation between MID and RFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.
MID vs. RFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MID
RFG
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Financial Services
Utilities
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
Real Estate
-
Industrials
MID
RFG
Technology
MID
RFG
Healthcare
MID
RFG
Consumer Cyclical
MID
RFG
Energy
MID
RFG
Financial Services
MID
RFG
Utilities
MID
RFG
Basic Materials
MID
RFG
Consumer Defensive
MID
RFG
Communication Services
MID
-
RFG
Real Estate
MID
-
RFG
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
MID vs. RFG — Risk / Return Rank
MID
RFG
MID vs. RFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF (MID) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). 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.
| MID | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.31 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.49 | 3.18 | -2.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.45 | 12.89 | -11.44 |
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
| MID | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41 | 1.79 | -1.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.27 | 0.38 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.46 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.41 | 0.43 | -0.02 |
Drawdowns
MID vs. RFG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MID drawdown since its inception was -40.15%, smaller than the maximum RFG drawdown of -51.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MID and RFG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MID | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.15% | -51.93% | +11.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.89% | -10.41% | -3.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.92% | -26.71% | +2.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -40.15% | -35.16% | -4.99% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.92% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.48% | 0.00% | -0.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.44% | -8.97% | -4.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.66% | 2.56% | +2.10% |
Volatility
MID vs. RFG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF (MID) is 4.88%, while Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) has a volatility of 6.50%. This indicates that MID experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MID | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.88% | 6.50% | -1.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.00% | 14.72% | -1.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.73% | 18.53% | -1.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.63% | 22.81% | +0.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.92% | 23.05% | +0.87% |
MID vs. RFG - Expense Ratio Comparison
MID has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than RFG's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
MID vs. RFG - Dividend Comparison
MID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, less than RFG's 0.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MID American Century Mid Cap Growth Impact ETF | 0.15% | 0.18% | 0.17% | 0.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 0.31% | 0.43% | 0.38% | 0.99% | 0.78% | 0.05% | 0.27% | 0.64% | 0.76% | 0.66% | 0.35% | 0.61% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MID and RFG have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RFG has higher volatility (6.50%) compared to MID (4.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MID dropped -40.15% vs RFG's -51.93%.
On 5-year performance, RFG leads with 8.63% vs 6.25% for MID. On fees, RFG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, MID has been the lower-risk option at 4.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, RFG has performed better with a 8.63% return vs 6.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RFG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for MID.
RFG has the higher dividend yield at 0.31%, compared with 0.15% for MID.
MID is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while RFG is Small Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: American Century and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for MID and 0.35% for RFG.
RFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 0.41), 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 MID and RFG
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