RFG vs. XSMO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

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 10.49%/yr vs 14.62%/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

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RFG having a 22.14% return and XSMO slightly lower at 21.96%. Over the past 10 years, RFG has underperformed XSMO with an annualized return of 10.49%, while XSMO has yielded a comparatively higher 14.62% 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%

XSMO

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 1.29%
• YTD: 21.96%
• 6M: 20.33%
• 1Y: 32.93%
• 3Y*: 24.51%
• 5Y*: 11.21%
• 10Y*: 14.62%

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

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	22.14%	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	21.96%	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 0.85, 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	0.85
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 8, 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	31.3%	19.5%
Technology	21.2%	20.9%
Healthcare	19.4%	13.9%
Consumer Cyclical	7.6%	9.0%
Energy	5.4%	3.1%
Financial Services	3.7%	12.3%
Basic Materials	3.3%	5.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.1%	2.4%
Utilities	2.4%	4.0%
Real Estate	2.2%	5.0%
Communication Services	0.6%	4.1%

Return for Risk

RFG vs. XSMO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFG

RFG Risk / Return Rank: 57
RFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
RFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
RFG Omega Ratio Rank: 49
RFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
RFG Martin Ratio Rank: 69

XSMO

XSMO Risk / Return Rank: 58
XSMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
XSMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
XSMO Omega Ratio Rank: 47
XSMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
XSMO Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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. 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.

	RFG	XSMO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	1.77	+0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.55	2.56	0.00
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.30	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.18	3.72	-0.54
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.89	12.71	+0.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RFG vs. XSMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the XSMO Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFG and XSMO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RFG	XSMO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	1.77	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38	0.50	-0.12
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	0.61	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.39	+0.04

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFG	XSMO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest 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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.72%	+1.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.97%	-11.13%	+2.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.56%	2.60%	-0.04%

Volatility

RFG vs. XSMO - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) and Invesco S&P SmallCap Momentum ETF (XSMO) have volatilities of 6.50% and 6.34%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFG	XSMO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.50%	6.34%	+0.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.72%	14.11%	+0.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.53%	18.73%	-0.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.81%	22.67%	+0.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.05%	24.12%	-1.07%

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 0.31%, 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	0.31%	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

Can I hold both RFG and XSMO in my portfolio?

RFG and XSMO have a correlation of 0.85, 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 XSMO?

RFG has higher volatility (6.50%) compared to XSMO (6.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFG dropped -51.93% vs XSMO's -58.06%.

Which ETF is better, RFG or XSMO?

On 10-year performance, XSMO leads with 14.62% vs 10.49% for RFG. On fees, RFG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XSMO has been the lower-risk option at 6.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFG or XSMO?

Over the 10-year period, XSMO has performed better with a 14.62% return vs 10.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFG or XSMO?

RFG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for XSMO.

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

XSMO has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.31% for RFG.

What is the main difference between RFG and XSMO?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 1.77), 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.