RFG vs. XSMO
RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) and XSMO (Invesco S&P SmallCap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth, while XSMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFG returned 10.97%/yr vs 15.24%/yr for XSMO. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RFG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for XSMO.
Performance
RFG vs. XSMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFG achieves a 20.79% return, which is significantly lower than XSMO's 24.23% return. Over the past 10 years, RFG has underperformed XSMO with an annualized return of 10.97%, while XSMO has yielded a comparatively higher 15.24% annualized return.
RFG
- 1D
- -1.97%
- 1M
- 2.77%
- YTD
- 20.79%
- 6M
- 18.16%
- 1Y
- 33.12%
- 3Y*
- 19.62%
- 5Y*
- 7.71%
- 10Y*
- 10.97%
XSMO
- 1D
- -1.05%
- 1M
- 3.78%
- YTD
- 24.23%
- 6M
- 20.02%
- 1Y
- 34.26%
- 3Y*
- 25.28%
- 5Y*
- 11.43%
- 10Y*
- 15.24%
RFG vs. XSMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 20.79% | 8.80% | 17.80% | 16.42% | -21.70% | 13.81% | 32.86% | 17.09% | -13.98% | 20.46% |
XSMO Invesco S&P SmallCap Momentum ETF | 24.23% | 9.80% | 17.45% | 21.55% | -15.44% | 19.24% | 21.96% | 28.65% | -3.44% | 23.95% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFG and XSMO is 0.86, 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 | 0.86 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2006 | 0.84 |
The correlation between RFG and XSMO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
RFG vs. XSMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RFG
XSMO
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
Communication Services
Industrials
RFG
XSMO
Technology
RFG
XSMO
Healthcare
RFG
XSMO
Energy
RFG
XSMO
Consumer Defensive
RFG
XSMO
Consumer Cyclical
RFG
XSMO
Financial Services
RFG
XSMO
Basic Materials
RFG
XSMO
Utilities
RFG
XSMO
Real Estate
RFG
XSMO
Communication Services
RFG
XSMO
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. XSMO — Risk / Return Rank
RFG
XSMO
RFG vs. XSMO - 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 S&P SmallCap Momentum ETF (XSMO). 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 | XSMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.30 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.20 | 3.87 | -0.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.88 | 13.07 | -0.19 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RFG vs. XSMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFG drawdown since its inception was -51.93%, smaller than the maximum XSMO drawdown of -58.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFG and XSMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFG | XSMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.93% | -58.06% | +6.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.41% | -8.89% | -1.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.71% | -24.76% | -1.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.16% | -29.62% | -5.54% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.92% | -39.39% | -3.53% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.97% | -1.05% | -0.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.95% | -11.11% | +2.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.58% | 2.63% | -0.05% |
Volatility
RFG vs. XSMO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) is 6.67%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap Momentum ETF (XSMO) has a volatility of 7.31%. This indicates that RFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XSMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFG | XSMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.67% | 7.31% | -0.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.63% | 14.94% | +0.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.25% | 19.41% | -0.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.93% | 22.64% | +0.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.07% | 24.13% | -1.06% |
RFG vs. XSMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than XSMO's 0.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFG vs. XSMO - Dividend Comparison
RFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.14%, less than XSMO's 0.53% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XSMO Invesco S&P SmallCap Momentum ETF | 0.53% | 0.75% | 0.63% | 0.96% | 1.19% | 0.30% | 0.82% | 0.69% | 0.66% | 0.27% | 0.30% | 0.35% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFG and XSMO have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XSMO has higher volatility (7.31%) compared to RFG (6.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFG dropped -51.93% vs XSMO's -58.06%.
On 10-year performance, XSMO leads with 15.24% vs 10.97% for RFG. On fees, RFG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RFG has been the lower-risk option at 6.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XSMO has performed better with a 15.24% return vs 10.97%. 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 0.36% for XSMO.
XSMO has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.14% for RFG.
RFG is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while XSMO is Momentum. RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth, while XSMO tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Momentum Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFG and 0.36% for XSMO.
XSMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.73), 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 XSMO
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