RFG vs. RIGS
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) and RiverFront Strategic Income Fund (RIGS).
RFG and RIGS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. RFG is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. It was launched on Mar 1, 2006. RIGS is an actively managed fund by SS&C. It was launched on Oct 9, 2013.
Performance
RFG vs. RIGS - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
RFG vs. RIGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 4.55% | 8.80% | 17.80% | 16.42% | -21.70% | 13.81% | 32.86% | 17.09% | -13.98% | 20.46% |
RIGS RiverFront Strategic Income Fund | 0.29% | 4.63% | 4.45% | 6.07% | -5.72% | 1.93% | 3.58% | 7.60% | -0.11% | 4.48% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFG achieves a 4.55% return, which is significantly higher than RIGS's 0.29% return. Over the past 10 years, RFG has outperformed RIGS with an annualized return of 9.04%, while RIGS has yielded a comparatively lower 3.30% annualized return.
RFG
- 1D
- 3.68%
- 1M
- -6.38%
- YTD
- 4.55%
- 6M
- 7.67%
- 1Y
- 25.57%
- 3Y*
- 14.99%
- 5Y*
- 4.84%
- 10Y*
- 9.04%
RIGS
- 1D
- 1.20%
- 1M
- -1.32%
- YTD
- 0.29%
- 6M
- 0.52%
- 1Y
- 3.83%
- 3Y*
- 4.32%
- 5Y*
- 2.17%
- 10Y*
- 3.30%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
RFG vs. RIGS - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than RIGS's 0.48% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
RFG vs. RIGS — Risk / Return Rank
RFG
RIGS
RFG vs. RIGS - 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 RiverFront Strategic Income Fund (RIGS). 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 | RIGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.10 | 0.38 | +0.73 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.69 | 0.61 | +1.07 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.08 | +0.14 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.90 | 0.66 | +1.24 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.23 | 1.68 | +6.55 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RFG | RIGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.10 | 0.38 | +0.73 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 | 0.29 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.39 | 0.43 | -0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.40 | 0.45 | -0.06 |
Correlation
The correlation between RFG and RIGS is 0.30, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
RFG vs. RIGS - Dividend Comparison
RFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than RIGS's 4.84% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 0.37% | 0.43% | 0.38% | 0.99% | 0.78% | 0.05% | 0.27% | 0.64% | 0.76% | 0.66% | 0.35% | 0.61% |
RIGS RiverFront Strategic Income Fund | 4.84% | 4.84% | 4.49% | 3.48% | 2.71% | 2.47% | 3.77% | 3.87% | 4.54% | 4.45% | 4.46% | 3.61% |
Drawdowns
RFG vs. RIGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFG drawdown since its inception was -51.93%, which is greater than RIGS's maximum drawdown of -15.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFG and RIGS.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFG | RIGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.93% | -15.31% | -36.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.44% | -5.18% | -8.26% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.16% | -9.03% | -26.13% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.92% | -15.31% | -27.61% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.11% | -2.14% | -4.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.03% | -1.59% | -7.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.10% | 2.04% | +1.06% |
Volatility
RFG vs. RIGS - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) has a higher volatility of 8.63% compared to RiverFront Strategic Income Fund (RIGS) at 2.34%. This indicates that RFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RIGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| RFG | RIGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.63% | 2.34% | +6.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.19% | 6.17% | +8.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.25% | 10.16% | +13.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.73% | 7.47% | +15.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.98% | 7.75% | +15.23% |