PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RFV vs. IMCV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RFV vs. IMCV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Value ETF (IMCV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RFV having a 19.10% return and IMCV slightly lower at 18.24%. Over the past 10 years, RFV has outperformed IMCV with an annualized return of 12.42%, while IMCV has yielded a comparatively lower 10.82% annualized return.


RFV

1D
-0.87%
1M
5.31%
6M
8.28%
YTD
19.10%
1Y
26.43%
3Y*
14.31%
5Y*
12.20%
10Y*
12.42%
ALL TIME*
10.01%

IMCV

1D
-0.33%
1M
3.79%
6M
11.45%
YTD
18.24%
1Y
27.38%
3Y*
16.79%
5Y*
10.92%
10Y*
10.82%
ALL TIME*
9.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$2.08M$2.27M$2.03M
$1.31M$1.15M$815.25K

RFV vs. IMCV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RFV
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF
19.10%7.66%5.63%30.26%-3.99%33.02%9.61%24.98%-18.56%14.74%
IMCV
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Value ETF
18.24%13.52%12.28%11.89%-6.98%33.56%-4.11%24.72%-10.93%12.60%

Correlation

The correlation between RFV and IMCV is 0.81, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.86

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.90

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2006

0.87

The correlation between RFV and IMCV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFV vs. IMCV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFV
IMCV

Consumer Cyclical

24.8%
8.4%

Financial Services

17.8%
17.7%

Energy

13.8%
11.4%

Technology

11.8%
9.3%

Industrials

11.0%
11.6%

Basic Materials

6.6%
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

6.2%
8.6%

Real Estate

3.8%
5.5%

Healthcare

2.4%
10.3%

Communication Services

1.8%
2.4%

Utilities

-

10.1%

Consumer Cyclical

RFV
24.8%
IMCV
8.4%

Financial Services

RFV
17.8%
IMCV
17.7%

Energy

RFV
13.8%
IMCV
11.4%

Technology

RFV
11.8%
IMCV
9.3%

Industrials

RFV
11.0%
IMCV
11.6%

Basic Materials

RFV
6.6%
IMCV
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

RFV
6.2%
IMCV
8.6%

Real Estate

RFV
3.8%
IMCV
5.5%

Healthcare

RFV
2.4%
IMCV
10.3%

Communication Services

RFV
1.8%
IMCV
2.4%

Utilities

RFV

-

IMCV
10.1%

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

RFV vs. IMCV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RFV
RFV Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
RFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFV Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
RFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFV Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank

IMCV
IMCV Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
IMCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMCV Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
IMCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMCV Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RFV vs. IMCV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Value ETF (IMCV). 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.


RFVIMCVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.42

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.12

3.98

-1.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.75

15.26

-8.51

RFV vs. IMCV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the IMCV Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFV and IMCV, 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...

Drawdowns

RFV vs. IMCV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than IMCV's maximum drawdown of -64.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and IMCV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFVIMCVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.82%

-64.74%

-7.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.51%

-6.90%

-5.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.65%

-18.63%

-6.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.65%

-19.87%

-4.78%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-52.24%

-46.33%

-5.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.87%

-0.33%

-0.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.72%

-8.35%

-1.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.93%

1.80%

+2.13%

Volatility

RFV vs. IMCV - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) has a higher volatility of 3.68% compared to iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Value ETF (IMCV) at 3.05%. This indicates that RFV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IMCV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFVIMCVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.68%

3.05%

+0.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.24%

8.17%

+3.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.88%

11.50%

+5.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.77%

16.51%

+5.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.84%

19.54%

+5.30%

RFV vs. IMCV - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than IMCV's 0.06% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFV vs. IMCV - Dividend Comparison

RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, less than IMCV's 1.79% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IMCV
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Value ETF
1.79%2.23%2.36%2.30%2.36%1.86%2.61%2.45%2.61%1.87%2.09%2.29%
RFV
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF
1.60%2.07%1.31%1.27%2.05%1.60%1.52%1.71%1.39%1.36%0.88%1.79%

Frequently Asked Questions


RFV and IMCV have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RFV has higher volatility (3.68%) compared to IMCV (3.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs IMCV's -64.74%.

On 10-year performance, RFV leads with 12.42% vs 10.82% for IMCV. On fees, IMCV is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, IMCV has been the lower-risk option at 3.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RFV has performed better with a 12.42% return vs 10.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IMCV is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RFV.

IMCV has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 1.60% for RFV.

RFV tracks S&P MidCap 400 Pure Value Index, while IMCV tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Value Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFV and 0.06% for IMCV.

IMCV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 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 RFV and IMCV

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