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

Performance

RFV vs. PRN - 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 Invesco DWA Industrials Momentum ETF (PRN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFV achieves a 13.04% return, which is significantly lower than PRN's 41.80% return. Over the past 10 years, RFV has underperformed PRN with an annualized return of 12.53%, while PRN has yielded a comparatively higher 18.51% annualized return.


RFV

1D
-0.36%
1M
3.75%
YTD
13.04%
6M
10.71%
1Y
25.06%
3Y*
16.77%
5Y*
10.00%
10Y*
12.53%

PRN

1D
0.59%
1M
6.86%
YTD
41.80%
6M
45.38%
1Y
65.12%
3Y*
36.96%
5Y*
20.18%
10Y*
18.51%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RFV vs. PRN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RFV
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF
13.04%7.66%5.63%30.26%-3.99%33.02%9.61%24.98%-18.56%14.74%
PRN
Invesco DWA Industrials Momentum ETF
41.80%13.74%30.35%37.96%-25.09%25.21%36.39%34.52%-16.19%22.82%

Correlation

The correlation between RFV and PRN is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.49

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

0.66

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

0.74

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2006

0.75

Over the past year, the correlation between RFV and PRN has dropped to 0.49 - well below their long-term average of 0.75, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

RFV vs. PRN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFV
PRN

Consumer Cyclical

24.4%
1.2%

Financial Services

17.5%
0.1%

Energy

12.9%
1.6%

Technology

12.9%
19.4%

Industrials

11.4%
79.3%

Consumer Defensive

9.1%

-

Basic Materials

7.6%
1.8%

Real Estate

3.5%

-

Healthcare

0.7%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

RFV
24.4%
PRN
1.2%

Financial Services

RFV
17.5%
PRN
0.1%

Energy

RFV
12.9%
PRN
1.6%

Technology

RFV
12.9%
PRN
19.4%

Industrials

RFV
11.4%
PRN
79.3%

Consumer Defensive

RFV
9.1%
PRN

-

Basic Materials

RFV
7.6%
PRN
1.8%

Real Estate

RFV
3.5%
PRN

-

Healthcare

RFV
0.7%
PRN

-

Communication Services

RFV

-

PRN

-

Utilities

RFV

-

PRN

-

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. PRN — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFV
RFV Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
RFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFV Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
RFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFV Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank

PRN
PRN Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
PRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
PRN Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
PRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
PRN Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

RFV vs. PRN - 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 Invesco DWA Industrials Momentum ETF (PRN). 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.


RFVPRNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.89

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.37

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.01

4.63

-2.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.94

15.45

-9.50

RFV vs. PRN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is lower than the PRN Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFV and PRN, 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


RFVPRNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.39

2.29

-0.89

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

0.81

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

0.77

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.52

-0.14

Drawdowns

RFV vs. PRN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than PRN's maximum drawdown of -59.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and PRN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFVPRNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.82%

-59.88%

-11.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.51%

-14.15%

+1.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.65%

-30.78%

+6.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.65%

-34.84%

+10.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-52.24%

-36.27%

-15.97%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.36%

-0.47%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.79%

-10.84%

+1.05%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.23%

4.23%

0.00%

Volatility

RFV vs. PRN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) is 4.60%, while Invesco DWA Industrials Momentum ETF (PRN) has a volatility of 10.95%. This indicates that RFV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PRN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFVPRNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.60%

10.95%

-6.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.86%

23.22%

-11.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.13%

28.66%

-10.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.08%

25.03%

-2.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.99%

24.17%

+0.82%

RFV vs. PRN - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than PRN's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFV vs. PRN - Dividend Comparison

RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, more than PRN's 0.11% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
PRN
Invesco DWA Industrials Momentum ETF
0.11%0.17%0.39%0.52%0.82%0.11%0.10%0.42%0.29%0.60%0.57%0.44%
RFV
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF
1.84%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 PRN have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PRN has higher volatility (10.95%) compared to RFV (4.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs PRN's -59.88%.

On 10-year performance, PRN leads with 18.51% vs 12.53% for RFV. On fees, RFV is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RFV has been the lower-risk option at 4.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, PRN has performed better with a 18.51% return vs 12.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RFV is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PRN.

RFV has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 0.11% for PRN.

RFV is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while PRN is Momentum. RFV tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while PRN tracks DWA Industrials Technical Leaders Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFV and 0.60% for PRN.

PRN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.39), 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 PRN

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