PWC vs. RSHO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PWC (Invesco Dynamic Market ETF) and RSHO (Tema American Reshoring ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. PWC is passively managed, while RSHO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PWC returned 13.71%/yr vs 31.02%/yr for RSHO. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PWC charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for RSHO.

Performance

PWC vs. RSHO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Dynamic Market ETF (PWC) and Tema American Reshoring ETF (RSHO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PWC achieves a 5.85% return, which is significantly lower than RSHO's 33.69% return.

PWC

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 5.85%
• 6M: 6.04%
• 1Y: 8.50%
• 3Y*: 13.71%
• 5Y*: 6.10%
• 10Y*: 9.52%

RSHO

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 7.69%
• YTD: 33.69%
• 6M: 33.85%
• 1Y: 57.71%
• 3Y*: 31.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PWC vs. RSHO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PWC Invesco Dynamic Market ETF	5.85%	6.15%	17.46%	14.11%
RSHO Tema American Reshoring ETF	33.69%	19.23%	17.28%	28.26%

Correlation

The correlation between PWC and RSHO is 0.58, 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	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2023	0.73

The correlation between PWC and RSHO shifts across timeframes, from 0.58 (1 year) to 0.73 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PWC vs. RSHO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PWC	RSHO
Technology	26.1%	11.4%
Financial Services	14.0%	0.9%
Healthcare	12.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	11.5%	3.7%
Industrials	10.3%	73.1%
Communication Services	7.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	-
Real Estate	5.6%	-
Energy	5.5%	1.0%
Basic Materials	3.5%	8.5%
Utilities	2.7%	-

Return for Risk

PWC vs. RSHO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PWC

PWC Risk / Return Rank: 25
PWC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
PWC Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
PWC Omega Ratio Rank: 22
PWC Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
PWC Martin Ratio Rank: 28

RSHO

RSHO Risk / Return Rank: 73
RSHO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
RSHO Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
RSHO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
RSHO Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
RSHO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

PWC vs. RSHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dynamic Market ETF (PWC) and Tema American Reshoring ETF (RSHO). 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.

	PWC	RSHO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.88	2.44	-1.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.33	3.28	-1.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.40	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.32	3.96	-2.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.06	15.16	-11.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PWC vs. RSHO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PWC Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is lower than the RSHO Sharpe Ratio of 2.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PWC and RSHO, 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

	PWC	RSHO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88	2.44	-1.57
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.51	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.11	1.48	-1.37

Drawdowns

PWC vs. RSHO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PWC drawdown since its inception was -78.13%, which is greater than RSHO's maximum drawdown of -27.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWC and RSHO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PWC	RSHO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.13%	-27.31%	-50.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.45%	-14.64%	+8.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.12%	-27.31%	+12.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.58%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.37%	0.00%	-2.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-36.21%	-4.32%	-31.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.10%	3.82%	-1.72%

Volatility

PWC vs. RSHO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Dynamic Market ETF (PWC) is 2.14%, while Tema American Reshoring ETF (RSHO) has a volatility of 9.22%. This indicates that PWC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSHO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PWC	RSHO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.14%	9.22%	-7.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.19%	20.09%	-12.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.75%	23.74%	-13.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.07%	22.55%	-6.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.81%	22.55%	-3.74%

PWC vs. RSHO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PWC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than RSHO's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

PWC vs. RSHO - Dividend Comparison

PWC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, more than RSHO's 0.22% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PWC Invesco Dynamic Market ETF	1.68%	1.77%	1.58%	1.67%	1.51%	0.56%	1.09%	0.95%	1.44%	1.75%	1.35%	1.02%
RSHO Tema American Reshoring ETF	0.22%	0.30%	0.26%	0.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PWC and RSHO in my portfolio?

PWC and RSHO have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PWC or RSHO?

RSHO has higher volatility (9.22%) compared to PWC (2.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWC dropped -78.13% vs RSHO's -27.31%.

Which ETF is better, PWC or RSHO?

On 3-year performance, RSHO leads with 31.02% vs 13.71% for PWC. On fees, PWC is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, PWC has been the lower-risk option at 2.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PWC or RSHO?

Over the 3-year period, RSHO has performed better with a 31.02% return vs 13.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PWC or RSHO?

PWC is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for RSHO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PWC or RSHO?

PWC has the higher dividend yield at 1.68%, compared with 0.22% for RSHO.

What is the main difference between PWC and RSHO?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Tema. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PWC and 0.75% for RSHO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSHO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 vs 0.88), 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.