PWB vs. RPG
PWB (Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF) and RPG (Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds from Invesco - PWB tracks the Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index while RPG tracks the S&P 500/Citigroup Pure Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PWB returned 18.61%/yr vs 15.14%/yr for RPG. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PWB charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RPG.
Performance
PWB vs. RPG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PWB achieves a 26.79% return, which is significantly lower than RPG's 30.31% return. Over the past 10 years, PWB has outperformed RPG with an annualized return of 18.61%, while RPG has yielded a comparatively lower 15.14% annualized return.
PWB
- 1D
- -4.36%
- 1M
- 4.17%
- YTD
- 26.79%
- 6M
- 24.81%
- 1Y
- 42.75%
- 3Y*
- 32.92%
- 5Y*
- 17.17%
- 10Y*
- 18.61%
RPG
- 1D
- -4.60%
- 1M
- 5.48%
- YTD
- 30.31%
- 6M
- 27.62%
- 1Y
- 38.51%
- 3Y*
- 27.72%
- 5Y*
- 11.59%
- 10Y*
- 15.14%
PWB vs. RPG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PWB Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF | 26.79% | 24.94% | 31.04% | 30.61% | -25.81% | 19.58% | 31.89% | 24.68% | 0.88% | 30.71% |
RPG Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF | 30.31% | 13.41% | 28.23% | 8.04% | -27.55% | 29.40% | 29.34% | 28.34% | -4.53% | 26.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between PWB and RPG is 0.90, 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 | 0.90 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2006 | 0.90 |
The correlation between PWB and RPG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. RPG — Risk / Return Rank
PWB
RPG
PWB vs. RPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) and Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| PWB | RPG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.31 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.55 | 3.49 | +0.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.75 | 13.16 | +1.58 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PWB vs. RPG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PWB drawdown since its inception was -52.58%, roughly equal to the maximum RPG drawdown of -53.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWB and RPG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PWB | RPG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.58% | -53.27% | +0.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.11% | -11.08% | -1.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.10% | -24.75% | +2.65% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.41% | -35.59% | +4.18% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.36% | -36.58% | +4.22% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.36% | -4.60% | +0.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.22% | -8.83% | +0.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.91% | 2.93% | -0.02% |
Volatility
PWB vs. RPG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) is 10.34%, while Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) has a volatility of 11.10%. This indicates that PWB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RPG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PWB | RPG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.34% | 11.10% | -0.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.43% | 19.02% | -1.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.72% | 22.09% | -1.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.41% | 23.86% | -2.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.91% | 22.90% | -1.99% |
PWB vs. RPG - Expense Ratio Comparison
PWB has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than RPG's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
PWB vs. RPG - Dividend Comparison
PWB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
RPG Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF | 0.15% | 0.24% | 0.25% | 1.44% | 0.74% | 0.00% | 0.46% | 0.83% | 0.47% | 0.56% | 0.43% | 0.73% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.90, PWB and RPG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
RPG has higher volatility (11.10%) compared to PWB (10.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWB dropped -52.58% vs RPG's -53.27%.
On 10-year performance, PWB leads with 18.61% vs 15.14% for RPG. On fees, RPG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, PWB has been the lower-risk option at 10.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, PWB has performed better with a 18.61% return vs 15.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RPG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for PWB.
RPG has the higher dividend yield at 0.15%, compared with 0.00% for PWB.
PWB tracks Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index, while RPG tracks S&P 500/Citigroup Pure Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for PWB and 0.35% for RPG.
PWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.75), 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 PWB and RPG
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