RFG vs. DBO
RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) and DBO (Invesco DB Oil Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - RFG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth, while DBO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the DBIQ Optimum Yield Crude Oil Index Excess Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFG returned 11.19%/yr vs 9.34%/yr for DBO. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RFG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.78%/yr for DBO.
Performance
RFG vs. DBO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFG achieves a 23.21% return, which is significantly lower than DBO's 51.89% return. Over the past 10 years, RFG has outperformed DBO with an annualized return of 11.19%, while DBO has yielded a comparatively lower 9.34% annualized return.
RFG
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- 4.83%
- YTD
- 23.21%
- 6M
- 20.38%
- 1Y
- 35.48%
- 3Y*
- 20.42%
- 5Y*
- 8.35%
- 10Y*
- 11.19%
DBO
- 1D
- -1.91%
- 1M
- -17.64%
- YTD
- 51.89%
- 6M
- 50.65%
- 1Y
- 29.75%
- 3Y*
- 14.76%
- 5Y*
- 10.50%
- 10Y*
- 9.34%
RFG vs. DBO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 23.21% | 8.80% | 17.80% | 16.42% | -21.70% | 13.81% | 32.86% | 17.09% | -13.98% | 20.46% |
DBO Invesco DB Oil Fund | 51.89% | -11.71% | 7.85% | -4.44% | 13.04% | 60.74% | -20.99% | 28.05% | -15.22% | 4.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFG and DBO is -0.22, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2007 | 0.29 |
The correlation between RFG and DBO shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to 0.29 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
RFG vs. DBO — Risk / Return Rank
RFG
DBO
RFG vs. DBO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) and Invesco DB Oil Fund (DBO). 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.
| RFG | DBO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.17 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.43 | 1.35 | +2.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.82 | 3.56 | +10.26 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RFG vs. DBO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFG drawdown since its inception was -51.93%, smaller than the maximum DBO drawdown of -90.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFG and DBO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFG | DBO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.93% | -90.18% | +38.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.41% | -22.14% | +11.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.71% | -28.20% | +1.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.16% | -37.68% | +2.52% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.92% | -61.69% | +18.77% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -60.03% | +60.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.95% | -62.22% | +53.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.57% | 9.52% | -6.95% |
Volatility
RFG vs. DBO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) is 6.28%, while Invesco DB Oil Fund (DBO) has a volatility of 10.39%. This indicates that RFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DBO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFG | DBO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.28% | 10.39% | -4.11% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.49% | 29.37% | -13.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.18% | 34.94% | -15.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.91% | 32.53% | -9.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.10% | 31.84% | -8.74% |
RFG vs. DBO - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than DBO's 0.78% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFG vs. DBO - Dividend Comparison
RFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.32%, less than DBO's 2.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBO Invesco DB Oil Fund | 2.31% | 3.51% | 4.68% | 4.59% | 0.66% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.63% | 1.58% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 0.14% | 0.43% | 0.38% | 0.99% | 0.78% | 0.05% | 0.27% | 0.64% | 0.76% | 0.66% | 0.35% | 0.61% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFG and DBO have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DBO has higher volatility (10.39%) compared to RFG (6.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFG dropped -51.93% vs DBO's -90.18%.
On 10-year performance, RFG leads with 11.19% vs 9.34% for DBO. On fees, RFG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RFG has been the lower-risk option at 6.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, RFG has performed better with a 11.19% return vs 9.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RFG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.78% for DBO.
DBO has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 0.32% for RFG.
RFG is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while DBO is Oil & Gas. RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth, while DBO tracks DBIQ Optimum Yield Crude Oil Index Excess Return. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFG and 0.78% for DBO.
RFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 0.86), 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 RFG and DBO
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