PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MMSC vs. RFG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MMSC vs. RFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MMSC achieves a 17.91% return, which is significantly lower than RFG's 22.14% return.


MMSC

1D
-0.56%
1M
5.15%
YTD
17.91%
6M
17.19%
1Y
42.14%
3Y*
22.52%
5Y*
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%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MMSC vs. RFG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
MMSC
First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF
17.91%15.45%22.19%18.76%-30.98%1.01%
RFG
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF
22.14%8.80%17.80%16.42%-21.70%1.66%

Correlation

The correlation between MMSC and RFG is 0.89, 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

0.89

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2021

0.92

The correlation between MMSC and RFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

MMSC vs. RFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MMSC
RFG

Industrials

27.4%
31.3%

Technology

23.4%
21.2%

Healthcare

22.2%
19.4%

Financial Services

8.1%
3.7%

Consumer Cyclical

7.2%
7.6%

Energy

6.7%
5.4%

Basic Materials

2.5%
3.3%

Consumer Defensive

1.4%
3.1%

Utilities

0.7%
2.4%

Communication Services

0.5%
0.6%

Real Estate

0.2%
2.2%

Industrials

MMSC
27.4%
RFG
31.3%

Technology

MMSC
23.4%
RFG
21.2%

Healthcare

MMSC
22.2%
RFG
19.4%

Financial Services

MMSC
8.1%
RFG
3.7%

Consumer Cyclical

MMSC
7.2%
RFG
7.6%

Energy

MMSC
6.7%
RFG
5.4%

Basic Materials

MMSC
2.5%
RFG
3.3%

Consumer Defensive

MMSC
1.4%
RFG
3.1%

Utilities

MMSC
0.7%
RFG
2.4%

Communication Services

MMSC
0.5%
RFG
0.6%

Real Estate

MMSC
0.2%
RFG
2.2%

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

MMSC vs. RFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

MMSC
MMSC Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
MMSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MMSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
MMSC Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
MMSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
MMSC Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

RFG
RFG Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
RFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFG Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
RFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFG Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MMSC vs. RFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) 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.


MMSCRFGDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.90

1.79

+0.11

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.56

2.55

0.00

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.31

+0.01

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.00

3.18

-0.18

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

11.46

12.89

-1.43

MMSC vs. RFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MMSC Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the RFG Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MMSC and RFG, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MMSCRFGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.90

1.79

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.29

0.43

-0.14

Drawdowns

MMSC vs. RFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMSC drawdown since its inception was -40.82%, smaller than the maximum RFG drawdown of -51.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMSC and RFG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MMSCRFGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.82%

-51.93%

+11.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.10%

-10.41%

-3.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.76%

-26.71%

-3.05%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.70%

0.00%

-0.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.78%

-8.97%

-9.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.69%

2.56%

+1.13%

Volatility

MMSC vs. RFG - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) have volatilities of 6.69% and 6.50%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MMSCRFGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.69%

6.50%

+0.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.11%

14.72%

+2.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.35%

18.53%

+3.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.46%

22.81%

+1.65%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.46%

23.05%

+1.41%

MMSC vs. RFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMSC has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than RFG's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

MMSC vs. RFG - Dividend Comparison

MMSC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.31%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MMSC
First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF
0.00%0.00%0.41%0.00%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


MMSC and RFG have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MMSC has higher volatility (6.69%) compared to RFG (6.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMSC dropped -40.82% vs RFG's -51.93%.

On 3-year performance, MMSC leads with 22.52% vs 20.57% for RFG. On fees, RFG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RFG has been the lower-risk option at 6.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, MMSC has performed better with a 22.52% return vs 20.57%. 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 0.95% for MMSC.

RFG has the higher dividend yield at 0.31%, compared with 0.00% for MMSC.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MMSC and 0.35% for RFG.

MMSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 1.79), 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 MMSC 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