PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PRF vs. XLG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PRF vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF (PRF) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PRF achieves a 14.79% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 7.57% return. Over the past 10 years, PRF has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of 13.67%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 17.27% annualized return.


PRF

1D
-0.20%
1M
4.19%
YTD
14.79%
6M
15.01%
1Y
32.80%
3Y*
21.40%
5Y*
12.43%
10Y*
13.67%

XLG

1D
-1.15%
1M
4.22%
YTD
7.57%
6M
7.32%
1Y
28.54%
3Y*
24.46%
5Y*
16.24%
10Y*
17.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PRF vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
PRF
Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF
14.79%18.33%16.73%15.72%-7.79%31.12%7.78%27.42%-8.71%16.01%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
7.57%19.51%33.49%38.16%-24.29%30.77%24.15%32.04%-3.59%23.04%

Correlation

The correlation between PRF and XLG is 0.63, 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

0.63

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

0.65

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.74

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2005

0.85

Over the past year, the correlation between PRF and XLG has dropped to 0.63 - well below their long-term average of 0.85, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

PRF vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PRF
XLG

Technology

20.9%
43.9%

Financial Services

15.4%
9.6%

Healthcare

11.7%
7.0%

Communication Services

10.2%
17.1%

Industrials

9.2%
1.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.1%
11.3%

Energy

8.2%
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

6.3%
5.8%

Basic Materials

3.4%
0.6%

Utilities

3.1%

-

Real Estate

2.5%

-

Technology

PRF
20.9%
XLG
43.9%

Financial Services

PRF
15.4%
XLG
9.6%

Healthcare

PRF
11.7%
XLG
7.0%

Communication Services

PRF
10.2%
XLG
17.1%

Industrials

PRF
9.2%
XLG
1.9%

Consumer Cyclical

PRF
9.1%
XLG
11.3%

Energy

PRF
8.2%
XLG
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

PRF
6.3%
XLG
5.8%

Basic Materials

PRF
3.4%
XLG
0.6%

Utilities

PRF
3.1%
XLG

-

Real Estate

PRF
2.5%
XLG

-

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

PRF vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PRF
PRF Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
PRF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PRF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
PRF Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
PRF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
PRF Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

XLG
XLG Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
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.

PRF vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF (PRF) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.


PRFXLGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.38

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.00

2.31

+2.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

20.67

8.66

+12.00

PRF vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PRF Sharpe Ratio is 3.10, which is higher than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PRF and XLG, 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


PRFXLGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.10

2.15

+0.95

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.82

0.87

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

0.92

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.48

0.62

-0.14

Drawdowns

PRF vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PRF drawdown since its inception was -60.35%, which is greater than XLG's maximum drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRF and XLG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PRFXLGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.35%

-52.39%

-7.96%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.59%

-12.41%

+5.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.82%

-20.70%

+4.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.72%

-28.02%

+8.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.16%

-30.46%

-7.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.20%

-1.44%

+1.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.93%

-7.64%

+0.71%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.59%

3.30%

-1.71%

Volatility

PRF vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF (PRF) is 2.64%, while Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) has a volatility of 3.19%. This indicates that PRF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PRFXLGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.64%

3.19%

-0.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.74%

9.80%

-2.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.63%

13.33%

-2.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.18%

18.68%

-3.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.67%

18.84%

-1.17%

PRF vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PRF has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

PRF vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

PRF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, more than XLG's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
PRF
Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF
1.38%1.59%1.78%1.84%2.01%1.58%1.97%1.99%2.25%1.58%2.17%2.25%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
0.60%0.64%0.72%0.97%1.34%0.94%1.25%1.58%2.00%1.85%2.00%2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions


PRF and XLG have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XLG has higher volatility (3.19%) compared to PRF (2.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PRF dropped -60.35% vs XLG's -52.39%.

On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 17.27% vs 13.67% for PRF. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, PRF has been the lower-risk option at 2.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XLG has performed better with a 17.27% return vs 13.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for PRF.

PRF has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.60% for XLG.

PRF is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. PRF tracks RAFI Fundamental Select US 1000 Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for PRF and 0.20% for XLG.

PRF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.10 vs 2.15), 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 PRF and XLG

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