PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RFG vs. JSML
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RFG vs. JSML - 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 Janus Henderson Small Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JSML). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFG achieves a 22.14% return, which is significantly higher than JSML's 19.06% return. Over the past 10 years, RFG has underperformed JSML with an annualized return of 10.49%, while JSML has yielded a comparatively higher 12.88% annualized 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%

JSML

1D
-0.84%
1M
7.59%
YTD
19.06%
6M
17.83%
1Y
33.64%
3Y*
18.71%
5Y*
6.09%
10Y*
12.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RFG vs. JSML - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%20.46%
JSML
Janus Henderson Small Cap Growth Alpha ETF
19.06%13.41%12.45%30.09%-29.40%3.08%35.38%32.50%-2.53%20.93%

Correlation

The correlation between RFG and JSML is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.87

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2016

0.84

The correlation between RFG and JSML has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFG vs. JSML - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFG
JSML

Industrials

31.3%
23.4%

Technology

21.2%
24.8%

Healthcare

19.4%
20.9%

Consumer Cyclical

7.6%
5.8%

Energy

5.4%
2.2%

Financial Services

3.7%
9.2%

Basic Materials

3.3%
2.9%

Consumer Defensive

3.1%
2.6%

Utilities

2.4%

-

Real Estate

2.2%
3.4%

Communication Services

0.6%
2.1%

Industrials

RFG
31.3%
JSML
23.4%

Technology

RFG
21.2%
JSML
24.8%

Healthcare

RFG
19.4%
JSML
20.9%

Consumer Cyclical

RFG
7.6%
JSML
5.8%

Energy

RFG
5.4%
JSML
2.2%

Financial Services

RFG
3.7%
JSML
9.2%

Basic Materials

RFG
3.3%
JSML
2.9%

Consumer Defensive

RFG
3.1%
JSML
2.6%

Utilities

RFG
2.4%
JSML

-

Real Estate

RFG
2.2%
JSML
3.4%

Communication Services

RFG
0.6%
JSML
2.1%

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. JSML — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFG
RFG Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
RFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFG Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
RFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFG Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

JSML
JSML Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
JSML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JSML Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
JSML Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
JSML Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
JSML Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RFG vs. JSML - 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 Janus Henderson Small Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JSML). 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.


RFGJSMLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.27

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.18

2.28

+0.90

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.89

8.08

+4.81

RFG vs. JSML - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the JSML Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFG and JSML, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RFGJSMLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.79

1.57

+0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.38

0.25

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

0.53

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.56

-0.14

Drawdowns

RFG vs. JSML - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFG drawdown since its inception was -51.93%, which is greater than JSML's maximum drawdown of -39.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFG and JSML.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFGJSMLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-51.93%

-39.65%

-12.28%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.41%

-14.84%

+4.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.71%

-25.60%

-1.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.16%

-37.91%

+2.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.92%

-39.65%

-3.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.84%

+0.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.97%

-10.86%

+1.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.56%

4.17%

-1.61%

Volatility

RFG vs. JSML - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) is 6.50%, while Janus Henderson Small Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JSML) has a volatility of 7.49%. This indicates that RFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JSML based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFGJSMLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.50%

7.49%

-0.99%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.72%

15.94%

-1.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.53%

21.56%

-3.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.81%

24.34%

-1.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.05%

24.27%

-1.22%

RFG vs. JSML - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than JSML's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFG vs. JSML - Dividend Comparison

RFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.31%, less than JSML's 0.80% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
JSML
Janus Henderson Small Cap Growth Alpha ETF
0.80%0.94%1.19%0.49%0.67%0.46%0.30%0.27%0.76%0.42%0.52%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 JSML have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

JSML has higher volatility (7.49%) compared to RFG (6.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFG dropped -51.93% vs JSML's -39.65%.

On 10-year performance, JSML leads with 12.88% vs 10.49% for RFG. On fees, JSML is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, RFG has been the lower-risk option at 6.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, JSML has performed better with a 12.88% return vs 10.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

JSML is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RFG.

JSML has the higher dividend yield at 0.80%, compared with 0.31% for RFG.

RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth, while JSML tracks Janus Small Cap Growth Alpha Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Janus Henderson. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFG and 0.30% for JSML.

RFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 1.57), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RFG and JSML

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