PWB vs. PRFZ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PWB (Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF) and PRFZ (Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PWB is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index, while PRFZ is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PWB returned 18.47%/yr vs 11.50%/yr for PRFZ. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PWB charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for PRFZ.

Performance

PWB vs. PRFZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) and Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF (PRFZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PWB achieves a 28.68% return, which is significantly higher than PRFZ's 12.74% return. Over the past 10 years, PWB has outperformed PRFZ with an annualized return of 18.47%, while PRFZ has yielded a comparatively lower 11.50% annualized return.

PWB

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 10.94%
• YTD: 28.68%
• 6M: 28.89%
• 1Y: 45.84%
• 3Y*: 34.49%
• 5Y*: 18.36%
• 10Y*: 18.47%

PRFZ

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: 2.22%
• YTD: 12.74%
• 6M: 11.50%
• 1Y: 31.75%
• 3Y*: 17.38%
• 5Y*: 7.93%
• 10Y*: 11.50%

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

PWB vs. PRFZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PWB Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF	28.68%	24.94%	31.04%	30.61%	-25.81%	19.58%	31.89%	24.68%	0.88%	30.71%
PRFZ Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF	12.74%	11.26%	12.68%	20.21%	-16.29%	28.26%	11.84%	21.91%	-11.43%	13.82%

Correlation

The correlation between PWB and PRFZ is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.73
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2006	0.76

The correlation between PWB and PRFZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.64 (3 years) to 0.76 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PWB vs. PRFZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PWB	PRFZ
Technology	44.6%	20.4%
Industrials	15.9%	16.5%
Communication Services	10.9%	2.6%
Financial Services	10.3%	13.5%
Consumer Defensive	8.4%	2.5%
Consumer Cyclical	5.2%	10.2%
Healthcare	3.6%	16.2%
Utilities	1.6%	1.5%
Basic Materials	1.1%	3.3%
Energy	-	5.7%
Real Estate	-	6.8%

Return for Risk

PWB vs. PRFZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PWB

PWB Risk / Return Rank: 74
PWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
PWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
PWB Omega Ratio Rank: 69
PWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
PWB Martin Ratio Rank: 81

PRFZ

PRFZ Risk / Return Rank: 54
PRFZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
PRFZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
PRFZ Omega Ratio Rank: 47
PRFZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
PRFZ Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

PWB vs. PRFZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) and Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF (PRFZ). 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.

	PWB	PRFZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.50	1.79	+0.71
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.23	2.58	+0.65
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.30	+0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.80	3.07	+0.73
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	16.42	10.58	+5.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PWB vs. PRFZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.50, which is higher than the PRFZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PWB and PRFZ, 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

	PWB	PRFZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.50	1.79	+0.71
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88	0.37	+0.51
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.89	0.51	+0.38
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.61	0.41	+0.20

Drawdowns

PWB vs. PRFZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PWB drawdown since its inception was -52.58%, smaller than the maximum PRFZ drawdown of -62.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWB and PRFZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	PWB	PRFZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.58%	-62.41%	+9.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.11%	-10.38%	-1.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.10%	-26.54%	+4.44%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.41%	-26.58%	-4.83%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.36%	-44.28%	+11.92%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.32%	+1.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.23%	-9.42%	+1.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.80%	3.01%	-0.21%

Volatility

PWB vs. PRFZ - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) has a higher volatility of 5.38% compared to Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF (PRFZ) at 4.51%. This indicates that PWB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PRFZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PWB	PRFZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.38%	4.51%	+0.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.00%	12.32%	+2.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.47%	17.90%	+0.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.99%	21.31%	-0.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.71%	22.44%	-1.73%

PWB vs. PRFZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PWB has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than PRFZ's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

PWB vs. PRFZ - Dividend Comparison

PWB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PRFZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PRFZ Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF	0.85%	0.82%	1.45%	1.42%	1.33%	0.93%	0.91%	1.29%	1.37%	0.97%	1.31%	1.39%
PWB Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.08%	0.37%	0.31%	0.04%	0.21%	0.58%	0.97%	0.54%	0.82%	0.67%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PWB and PRFZ in my portfolio?

PWB and PRFZ have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PWB or PRFZ?

PWB has higher volatility (5.38%) compared to PRFZ (4.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWB dropped -52.58% vs PRFZ's -62.41%.

Which ETF is better, PWB or PRFZ?

On 10-year performance, PWB leads with 18.47% vs 11.50% for PRFZ. On fees, PRFZ is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, PRFZ has been the lower-risk option at 4.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PWB or PRFZ?

Over the 10-year period, PWB has performed better with a 18.47% return vs 11.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PWB or PRFZ?

PRFZ is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for PWB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PWB or PRFZ?

PRFZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.85%, compared with 0.00% for PWB.

What is the main difference between PWB and PRFZ?

PWB is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while PRFZ is Small Cap Blend Equities. PWB tracks Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index, while PRFZ tracks FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid Index. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for PWB and 0.39% for PRFZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 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.