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

Performance

RFV vs. QVAL - 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 Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL). 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 19.10% return, which is significantly lower than QVAL's 23.38% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with RFV having a 12.42% annualized return and QVAL not far behind at 11.88%.


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%

QVAL

1D
-0.19%
1M
6.48%
6M
13.15%
YTD
23.38%
1Y
39.88%
3Y*
19.61%
5Y*
13.24%
10Y*
11.88%
ALL TIME*
11.75%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$1.47M$1.75M$1.48M
$1.31M$1.15M$815.25K

RFV vs. QVAL - 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%
QVAL
Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF
23.38%10.98%12.21%28.40%-11.80%34.40%-5.93%24.06%-17.28%25.59%

Correlation

The correlation between RFV and QVAL is 0.80, 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.

0.80

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

0.85

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

0.87

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

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2016

0.86

The correlation between RFV and QVAL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFV vs. QVAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFV
QVAL

Consumer Cyclical

24.8%
21.6%

Financial Services

17.8%

-

Energy

13.8%
20.3%

Technology

11.8%
10.0%

Industrials

11.0%
12.3%

Basic Materials

6.6%
8.0%

Consumer Defensive

6.2%
5.9%

Real Estate

3.8%
2.0%

Healthcare

2.4%
14.1%

Communication Services

1.8%
5.8%

Utilities

-

2.0%

Consumer Cyclical

RFV
24.8%
QVAL
21.6%

Financial Services

RFV
17.8%
QVAL

-

Energy

RFV
13.8%
QVAL
20.3%

Technology

RFV
11.8%
QVAL
10.0%

Industrials

RFV
11.0%
QVAL
12.3%

Basic Materials

RFV
6.6%
QVAL
8.0%

Consumer Defensive

RFV
6.2%
QVAL
5.9%

Real Estate

RFV
3.8%
QVAL
2.0%

Healthcare

RFV
2.4%
QVAL
14.1%

Communication Services

RFV
1.8%
QVAL
5.8%

Utilities

RFV

-

QVAL
2.0%

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. QVAL — 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

QVAL
QVAL Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
QVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
QVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
QVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
QVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
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. QVAL - 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 Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL). 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.


RFVQVALDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.48

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.12

6.64

-4.52

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.75

20.62

-13.87

RFV vs. QVAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the QVAL Sharpe Ratio of 2.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFV and QVAL, 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. QVAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than QVAL's maximum drawdown of -51.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and QVAL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFVQVALDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.82%

-51.49%

-20.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.51%

-6.04%

-6.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.65%

-21.41%

-3.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.65%

-27.17%

+2.52%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-52.24%

-51.49%

-0.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.87%

-0.19%

-0.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.72%

-7.68%

-2.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.93%

1.95%

+1.98%

Volatility

RFV vs. QVAL - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL) have volatilities of 3.68% and 3.57%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFVQVALDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.68%

3.57%

+0.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.24%

10.29%

+0.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.88%

14.25%

+2.63%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.77%

21.57%

+0.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.84%

22.70%

+2.14%

RFV vs. QVAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than QVAL's 0.28% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFV vs. QVAL - Dividend Comparison

RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, more than QVAL's 1.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QVAL
Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF
1.39%1.44%1.72%1.76%2.00%1.23%1.86%1.99%1.64%1.08%1.30%0.00%
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 QVAL have a correlation of 0.80, 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 QVAL (3.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs QVAL's -51.49%.

On 10-year performance, RFV leads with 12.42% vs 11.88% for QVAL. On fees, QVAL is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QVAL has been the lower-risk option at 3.57%. 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 11.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QVAL is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RFV.

RFV has the higher dividend yield at 1.60%, compared with 1.39% for QVAL.

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFV and 0.28% for QVAL.

QVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 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 QVAL

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