PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PWB vs. RFDA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PWB vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PWB achieves a 28.40% return, which is significantly higher than RFDA's 12.43% return.


PWB

1D
0.50%
1M
10.85%
YTD
28.40%
6M
28.76%
1Y
46.56%
3Y*
34.40%
5Y*
18.57%
10Y*
18.44%

RFDA

1D
1.09%
1M
4.24%
YTD
12.43%
6M
13.60%
1Y
31.78%
3Y*
19.55%
5Y*
13.55%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PWB vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
PWB
Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF
28.40%24.94%31.04%30.61%-25.81%19.58%31.89%24.68%0.88%30.71%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
12.43%16.42%20.12%16.98%-8.58%25.94%11.26%27.15%-9.27%19.86%

Correlation

The correlation between PWB and RFDA 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

0.74

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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2016

0.79

The correlation between PWB and RFDA shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (1 year) to 0.79 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PWB vs. RFDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PWB
RFDA

Technology

44.6%
19.9%

Industrials

15.9%
8.9%

Communication Services

10.9%
8.8%

Financial Services

10.3%
14.7%

Consumer Defensive

8.4%
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

5.2%
7.0%

Healthcare

3.6%
8.8%

Utilities

1.6%
5.0%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.8%

Energy

-

12.5%

Real Estate

-

5.0%

Technology

PWB
44.6%
RFDA
19.9%

Industrials

PWB
15.9%
RFDA
8.9%

Communication Services

PWB
10.9%
RFDA
8.8%

Financial Services

PWB
10.3%
RFDA
14.7%

Consumer Defensive

PWB
8.4%
RFDA
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

PWB
5.2%
RFDA
7.0%

Healthcare

PWB
3.6%
RFDA
8.8%

Utilities

PWB
1.6%
RFDA
5.0%

Basic Materials

PWB
1.1%
RFDA
1.8%

Energy

PWB

-

RFDA
12.5%

Real Estate

PWB

-

RFDA
5.0%

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

PWB vs. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

PWB
PWB Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
PWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
PWB Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
PWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
PWB Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

RFDA
RFDA Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
RFDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFDA Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
RFDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFDA Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

PWB vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). 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.


PWBRFDADifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.53

2.75

-0.22

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.27

3.78

-0.51

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.51

-0.09

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.95

5.91

-1.96

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

17.10

21.66

-4.56

PWB vs. RFDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the RFDA Sharpe Ratio of 2.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PWB and RFDA, 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


PWBRFDADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.53

2.75

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

0.87

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.89

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

0.80

-0.19

Drawdowns

PWB vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PWB drawdown since its inception was -52.58%, which is greater than RFDA's maximum drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWB and RFDA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PWBRFDADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.58%

-34.60%

-17.98%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.11%

-5.45%

-6.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.10%

-19.35%

-2.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.41%

-19.35%

-12.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.24%

-3.75%

-4.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.80%

1.49%

+1.31%

Volatility

PWB vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) has a higher volatility of 5.39% compared to RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA) at 2.67%. This indicates that PWB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RFDA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PWBRFDADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.39%

2.67%

+2.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.03%

8.41%

+6.62%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.48%

11.60%

+6.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.00%

15.73%

+5.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.71%

16.85%

+3.86%

PWB vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

PWB has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.


Dividends

PWB vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison

PWB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RFDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.76%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
RFDA
RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF
1.76%1.89%2.23%2.68%3.57%1.44%1.62%1.87%2.44%1.90%0.98%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PWB and RFDA 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.

PWB has higher volatility (5.39%) compared to RFDA (2.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWB dropped -52.58% vs RFDA's -34.60%.

On 5-year performance, PWB leads with 18.57% vs 13.55% for RFDA. On fees, RFDA is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, RFDA has been the lower-risk option at 2.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, PWB has performed better with a 18.57% return vs 13.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RFDA is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for PWB.

RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.76%, compared with 0.00% for PWB.

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for PWB and 0.52% for RFDA.

RFDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.75 vs 2.53), 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 PWB and RFDA

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