QGRW vs. RPG

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

QGRW (WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund) and RPG (Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - QGRW tracks the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Index while RPG tracks the S&P 500/Citigroup Pure Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QGRW returned 26.28%/yr vs 28.92%/yr for RPG. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QGRW charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RPG.

Performance

QGRW vs. RPG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) and Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QGRW achieves a 9.00% return, which is significantly lower than RPG's 34.97% return.

QGRW

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: -3.66%
• YTD: 9.00%
• 6M: 7.55%
• 1Y: 24.69%
• 3Y*: 26.28%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RPG

• 1D: 3.38%
• 1M: 6.35%
• YTD: 34.97%
• 6M: 31.79%
• 1Y: 41.69%
• 3Y*: 28.92%
• 5Y*: 12.35%
• 10Y*: 15.80%

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

QGRW vs. RPG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund	9.00%	19.20%	34.85%	56.05%	-3.07%
RPG Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF	34.97%	13.41%	28.23%	8.04%	-5.07%

Correlation

The correlation between QGRW and RPG is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2022	0.77

The correlation between QGRW and RPG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

QGRW vs. RPG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QGRW	RPG
Technology	55.0%	46.9%
Communication Services	16.4%	5.4%
Consumer Cyclical	11.6%	14.7%
Industrials	7.6%	14.0%
Healthcare	4.4%	6.4%
Financial Services	3.7%	5.3%
Energy	0.5%	1.6%
Consumer Defensive	0.5%	1.1%
Utilities	0.3%	2.4%
Basic Materials	-	1.2%
Real Estate	-	1.0%

Return for Risk

QGRW vs. RPG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QGRW

QGRW Risk / Return Rank: 40
QGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
QGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
QGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 41
QGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
QGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 42

RPG

RPG Risk / Return Rank: 71
RPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
RPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
RPG Omega Ratio Rank: 64
RPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
RPG Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

QGRW vs. RPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) 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.

	QGRW	RPG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.33	1.88	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	2.53	-0.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.33	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.61	3.78	-2.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.97	14.18	-8.21

QGRW vs. RPG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QGRW Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is comparable to the RPG Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QGRW and RPG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

QGRW vs. RPG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QGRW drawdown since its inception was -24.40%, smaller than the maximum RPG drawdown of -53.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QGRW and RPG.

Drawdown Indicators

	QGRW	RPG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.40%	-53.27%	+28.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.44%	-11.08%	-4.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.40%	-24.75%	+0.35%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.59%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.58%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.82%	-1.19%	-5.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.29%	-8.82%	+5.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.14%	2.95%	+1.19%

Volatility

QGRW vs. RPG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) is 7.92%, while Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) has a volatility of 11.27%. This indicates that QGRW 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.

Volatility by Period

	QGRW	RPG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.92%	11.27%	-3.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.10%	19.21%	-4.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.64%	22.24%	-3.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.27%	23.91%	-2.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.27%	22.91%	-1.64%

QGRW vs. RPG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QGRW has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than RPG's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

QGRW vs. RPG - Dividend Comparison

QGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%, less than RPG's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund	0.08%	0.09%	0.14%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both QGRW and RPG in my portfolio?

QGRW and RPG have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QGRW or RPG?

RPG has higher volatility (11.27%) compared to QGRW (7.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QGRW dropped -24.40% vs RPG's -53.27%.

Which ETF is better, QGRW or RPG?

On 3-year performance, RPG leads with 28.92% vs 26.28% for QGRW. On fees, QGRW is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QGRW has been the lower-risk option at 7.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QGRW or RPG?

Over the 3-year period, RPG has performed better with a 28.92% return vs 26.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QGRW or RPG?

QGRW is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RPG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QGRW or RPG?

RPG has the higher dividend yield at 0.15%, compared with 0.08% for QGRW.

What is the main difference between QGRW and RPG?

QGRW tracks WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Index, while RPG tracks S&P 500/Citigroup Pure Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for QGRW and 0.35% for RPG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RPG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 1.33), 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.