RFG vs. FDIS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) and FDIS (Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth, while FDIS is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Consumer Discretionary 25/50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFG returned 9.64%/yr vs 13.50%/yr for FDIS. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RFG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FDIS.

Performance

RFG vs. FDIS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) and Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFG achieves a 13.90% return, which is significantly higher than FDIS's -0.23% return. Over the past 10 years, RFG has underperformed FDIS with an annualized return of 9.64%, while FDIS has yielded a comparatively higher 13.50% annualized return.

RFG

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -4.54%
• 6M: 8.66%
• YTD: 13.90%
• 1Y: 19.95%
• 3Y*: 14.10%
• 5Y*: 6.33%
• 10Y*: 9.64%
• ALL TIME*: 9.54%

FDIS

• 1D: 2.63%
• 1M: -1.18%
• 6M: -1.58%
• YTD: -0.23%
• 1Y: 9.49%
• 3Y*: 11.49%
• 5Y*: 5.36%
• 10Y*: 13.50%
• ALL TIME*: 12.48%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FDIS Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF	$8.73M	$7.77M	$9.21M
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF	$240.77K	$300.86K	$394.29K

RFG vs. FDIS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF	13.90%	8.80%	17.80%	16.42%	-21.70%	13.81%	32.86%	17.09%	-13.98%	20.46%
FDIS Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF	-0.23%	5.67%	24.43%	40.48%	-35.23%	24.25%	49.50%	27.44%	-0.88%	22.96%

Correlation

The correlation between RFG and FDIS is 0.59, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.69
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.76
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013	0.79

Over the past year, the correlation between RFG and FDIS has dropped to 0.59 - well below their long-term average of 0.79, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

RFG vs. FDIS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFG	FDIS
Industrials	31.6%	1.1%
Technology	23.3%	1.0%
Healthcare	19.3%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	6.7%	96.2%
Energy	4.0%	-
Basic Materials	3.6%	-
Financial Services	3.4%	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	1.2%
Utilities	2.2%	-
Real Estate	1.9%	0.1%
Communication Services	1.6%	0.3%

Return for Risk

RFG vs. FDIS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RFG

RFG Risk / Return Rank: 43
RFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
RFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
RFG Omega Ratio Rank: 36
RFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
RFG Martin Ratio Rank: 53

FDIS

FDIS Risk / Return Rank: 19
FDIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
FDIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
FDIS Omega Ratio Rank: 18
FDIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FDIS Martin Ratio Rank: 20

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RFG vs. FDIS - 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 Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS). 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	FDIS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.95	0.34	+0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.46	0.61	+0.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.07	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.81	0.43	+1.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.13	1.24	+4.89

RFG vs. FDIS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is higher than the FDIS Sharpe Ratio of 0.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFG and FDIS, 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

RFG vs. FDIS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFG drawdown since its inception was -51.93%, which is greater than FDIS's maximum drawdown of -39.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFG and FDIS.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFG	FDIS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.93%	-39.16%	-12.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.41%	-15.50%	+5.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.71%	-27.43%	+0.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.16%	-39.16%	+4.00%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.92%	-39.16%	-3.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.56%	-4.81%	-2.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.93%	-7.47%	-1.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.07%	5.36%	-2.29%

Volatility

RFG vs. FDIS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) is 6.10%, while Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS) has a volatility of 6.64%. This indicates that RFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FDIS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFG	FDIS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.10%	6.64%	-0.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.32%	14.66%	+1.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.84%	19.43%	+0.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.99%	24.09%	-1.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.10%	22.39%	+0.71%

RFG vs. FDIS - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FDIS's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFG vs. FDIS - Dividend Comparison

RFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, less than FDIS's 0.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FDIS Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF	0.73%	0.75%	0.69%	0.78%	1.00%	0.58%	0.59%	1.14%	1.29%	1.00%	1.62%	1.25%
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF	0.15%	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

Can I hold both RFG and FDIS in my portfolio?

RFG and FDIS have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFG or FDIS?

FDIS has higher volatility (6.64%) compared to RFG (6.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFG dropped -51.93% vs FDIS's -39.16%.

Which ETF is better, RFG or FDIS?

On 10-year performance, FDIS leads with 13.50% vs 9.64% for RFG. On fees, FDIS is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, RFG has been the lower-risk option at 6.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFG or FDIS?

Over the 10-year period, FDIS has performed better with a 13.50% return vs 9.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFG or FDIS?

FDIS is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RFG or FDIS?

FDIS has the higher dividend yield at 0.73%, compared with 0.15% for RFG.

What is the main difference between RFG and FDIS?

RFG is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while FDIS is Consumer Discretionary Equities. RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth, while FDIS tracks MSCI USA IMI Consumer Discretionary 25/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFG and 0.08% for FDIS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 vs 0.34), 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.