RFG vs. FLQS
RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) and FLQS (Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - RFG tracks the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth while FLQS tracks the LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RFG returned 8.63%/yr vs 5.27%/yr for FLQS. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.
Performance
RFG vs. FLQS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFG achieves a 22.14% return, which is significantly higher than FLQS's 6.14% return.
RFG
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- 7.30%
- YTD
- 22.14%
- 6M
- 21.89%
- 1Y
- 32.96%
- 3Y*
- 20.57%
- 5Y*
- 8.63%
- 10Y*
- 10.49%
FLQS
- 1D
- -0.81%
- 1M
- 0.12%
- YTD
- 6.14%
- 6M
- 5.99%
- 1Y
- 13.84%
- 3Y*
- 11.59%
- 5Y*
- 5.27%
- 10Y*
- —
RFG vs. FLQS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 22.14% | 8.80% | 17.80% | 16.42% | -21.70% | 13.81% | 32.86% | 17.09% | -13.98% | 12.13% |
FLQS Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF | 6.14% | 5.04% | 8.34% | 21.28% | -16.88% | 26.58% | 10.51% | 18.34% | -5.86% | 7.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFG and FLQS is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 1, 2017 | 0.80 |
The correlation between RFG and FLQS shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (1 year) to 0.88 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
RFG vs. FLQS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RFG
FLQS
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Communication Services
Industrials
RFG
FLQS
Technology
RFG
FLQS
Healthcare
RFG
FLQS
Consumer Cyclical
RFG
FLQS
Energy
RFG
FLQS
Financial Services
RFG
FLQS
Basic Materials
RFG
FLQS
Consumer Defensive
RFG
FLQS
Utilities
RFG
FLQS
Real Estate
RFG
FLQS
Communication Services
RFG
FLQS
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. FLQS — Risk / Return Rank
RFG
FLQS
RFG vs. FLQS - 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 Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS). 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.
| RFG | FLQS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.79 | 0.91 | +0.87 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.55 | 1.44 | +1.11 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.17 | +0.14 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.18 | 1.54 | +1.64 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.89 | 4.55 | +8.35 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RFG | FLQS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.79 | 0.91 | +0.87 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.38 | 0.28 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.46 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.43 | 0.38 | +0.05 |
Drawdowns
RFG vs. FLQS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFG drawdown since its inception was -51.93%, which is greater than FLQS's maximum drawdown of -42.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFG and FLQS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFG | FLQS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.93% | -42.16% | -9.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.41% | -9.00% | -1.41% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.71% | -23.12% | -3.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.16% | -28.05% | -7.11% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.92% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.33% | +1.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.97% | -8.02% | -0.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.56% | 3.05% | -0.49% |
Volatility
RFG vs. FLQS - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) has a higher volatility of 6.50% compared to Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS) at 4.09%. This indicates that RFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLQS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFG | FLQS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.50% | 4.09% | +2.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.72% | 10.26% | +4.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.53% | 15.22% | +3.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.81% | 19.24% | +3.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.05% | 21.68% | +1.37% |
RFG vs. FLQS - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both RFG and FLQS have an expense ratio of 0.35%.
Dividends
RFG vs. FLQS - Dividend Comparison
RFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.31%, less than FLQS's 1.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLQS Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF | 1.35% | 1.16% | 1.29% | 1.75% | 1.40% | 0.95% | 1.20% | 1.41% | 1.27% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 0.31% | 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 FLQS have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RFG has higher volatility (6.50%) compared to FLQS (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFG dropped -51.93% vs FLQS's -42.16%.
On 5-year performance, RFG leads with 8.63% vs 5.27% for FLQS. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, FLQS has been the lower-risk option at 4.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, RFG has performed better with a 8.63% return vs 5.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RFG and FLQS have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.
FLQS has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.31% for RFG.
RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth, while FLQS tracks LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Franklin Templeton.
RFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 0.91), 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 FLQS
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