RFV vs. RFG

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

RFV (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF) and RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFV is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while RFG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFV returned 12.60%/yr vs 9.64%/yr for RFG. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.

Performance

RFV vs. RFG - 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 S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFV achieves a 17.92% return, which is significantly higher than RFG's 13.90% return. Over the past 10 years, RFV has outperformed RFG with an annualized return of 12.60%, while RFG has yielded a comparatively lower 9.64% annualized return.

RFV

• 1D: -1.00%
• 1M: 4.85%
• 6M: 12.70%
• YTD: 17.92%
• 1Y: 27.20%
• 3Y*: 13.08%
• 5Y*: 12.15%
• 10Y*: 12.60%
• ALL TIME*: 9.96%

RFG

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -4.54%
• 6M: 8.66%
• YTD: 13.90%
• 1Y: 19.95%
• 3Y*: 14.10%
• 5Y*: 6.33%
• 10Y*: 9.64%
• ALL TIME*: 9.54%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF	$240.77K	$300.86K	$394.29K
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF	$925.25K	$998.96K	$749.36K

RFV vs. RFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF	17.92%	7.66%	5.63%	30.26%	-3.99%	33.02%	9.61%	24.98%	-18.56%	14.74%
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF	13.90%	8.80%	17.80%	16.42%	-21.70%	13.81%	32.86%	17.09%	-13.98%	20.46%

Correlation

The correlation between RFV and RFG is 0.61, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.79
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2006	0.79

The correlation between RFV and RFG shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (1 year) to 0.79 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RFV vs. RFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFV	RFG
Consumer Cyclical	24.8%	6.7%
Financial Services	17.8%	3.4%
Energy	13.8%	4.0%
Technology	11.8%	23.3%
Industrials	11.0%	31.6%
Basic Materials	6.6%	3.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	2.4%
Real Estate	3.8%	1.9%
Healthcare	2.4%	19.3%
Communication Services	1.8%	1.6%
Utilities	-	2.2%

Return for Risk

RFV vs. RFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFV

RFV Risk / Return Rank: 58
RFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
RFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
RFV Omega Ratio Rank: 58
RFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
RFV Martin Ratio Rank: 52

RFG

RFG Risk / Return Rank: 43
RFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
RFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
RFG Omega Ratio Rank: 36
RFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
RFG Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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. RFG - 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 S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). 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.

	RFV	RFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	0.95	+0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	1.46	+0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.17	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.91	1.81	+0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.08	6.13	-0.05

RFV vs. RFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is higher than the RFG Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFV and RFG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RFV vs. RFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than RFG's maximum drawdown of -51.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and RFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFV	RFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.82%	-51.93%	-19.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.51%	-10.41%	-2.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.65%	-26.71%	+2.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.65%	-35.16%	+10.51%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-52.24%	-42.92%	-9.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.00%	-7.56%	+6.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.73%	-8.93%	-0.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.94%	3.07%	+0.87%

Volatility

RFV vs. RFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) is 3.27%, while Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) has a volatility of 6.10%. This indicates that RFV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFV	RFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.27%	6.10%	-2.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.18%	16.32%	-5.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.10%	19.84%	-2.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.77%	22.99%	-1.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.83%	23.10%	+1.73%

RFV vs. RFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both RFV and RFG have an expense ratio of 0.35%.

Dividends

RFV vs. RFG - Dividend Comparison

RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.62%, more than RFG's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF	0.15%	0.43%	0.38%	0.99%	0.78%	0.05%	0.27%	0.64%	0.76%	0.66%	0.35%	0.61%
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF	1.62%	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

Can I hold both RFV and RFG in my portfolio?

RFV and RFG have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFV or RFG?

RFG has higher volatility (6.10%) compared to RFV (3.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs RFG's -51.93%.

Which ETF is better, RFV or RFG?

On 10-year performance, RFV leads with 12.60% vs 9.64% for RFG. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, RFV has been the lower-risk option at 3.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFV or RFG?

Over the 10-year period, RFV has performed better with a 12.60% return vs 9.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFV or RFG?

RFV and RFG have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

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

RFV has the higher dividend yield at 1.62%, compared with 0.15% for RFG.

What is the main difference between RFV and RFG?

RFV is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while RFG is Small Cap Growth Equities. RFV tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RFV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 0.95), 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.