RFV vs. SMCF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RFV (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF) and SMCF (Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds - RFV tracks the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value while SMCF tracks the Solactive US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RFV returned 21.60% vs 32.62% for SMCF. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RFV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for SMCF.

Performance

RFV vs. SMCF - 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 Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF (SMCF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFV achieves a 12.16% return, which is significantly lower than SMCF's 17.06% return.

RFV

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: 2.83%
• YTD: 12.16%
• 6M: 11.00%
• 1Y: 21.60%
• 3Y*: 15.04%
• 5Y*: 10.82%
• 10Y*: 12.72%

SMCF

• 1D: 0.74%
• 1M: 1.60%
• YTD: 17.06%
• 6M: 14.76%
• 1Y: 32.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RFV vs. SMCF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF	12.16%	7.66%	5.63%	8.69%
SMCF Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF	17.06%	9.56%	16.30%	7.07%

Correlation

The correlation between RFV and SMCF is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2023	0.86

The correlation between RFV and SMCF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFV vs. SMCF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFV	SMCF
Consumer Cyclical	25.5%	3.1%
Financial Services	17.4%	48.8%
Technology	14.2%	13.0%
Energy	12.1%	17.1%
Industrials	11.7%	9.1%
Basic Materials	7.6%	0.7%
Consumer Defensive	7.4%	1.3%
Real Estate	3.5%	0.5%
Healthcare	0.6%	4.8%
Communication Services	-	1.6%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

RFV vs. SMCF — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFV

RFV Risk / Return Rank: 36
RFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
RFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
RFV Omega Ratio Rank: 33
RFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
RFV Martin Ratio Rank: 35

SMCF

SMCF Risk / Return Rank: 72
SMCF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
SMCF Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
SMCF Omega Ratio Rank: 64
SMCF Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
SMCF Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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. SMCF - 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 Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF (SMCF). 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	SMCF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.20	2.04	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.87	2.93	-1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.36	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.73	4.60	-2.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.10	12.30	-7.19

RFV vs. SMCF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is lower than the SMCF Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFV and SMCF, 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. SMCF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than SMCF's maximum drawdown of -28.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and SMCF.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFV	SMCF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.82%	-28.48%	-43.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.51%	-7.13%	-5.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.65%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.65%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-52.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.86%	0.00%	-2.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.77%	-5.19%	-4.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.24%	2.66%	+1.58%

Volatility

RFV vs. SMCF - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) has a higher volatility of 4.28% compared to Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF (SMCF) at 3.23%. This indicates that RFV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SMCF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFV	SMCF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.28%	3.23%	+1.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.90%	9.86%	+2.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.02%	16.10%	+1.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.98%	20.21%	+1.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.94%	20.21%	+4.73%

RFV vs. SMCF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than SMCF's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFV vs. SMCF - Dividend Comparison

RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, less than SMCF's 3.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF	1.70%	2.07%	1.31%	1.27%	2.05%	1.60%	1.52%	1.71%	1.39%	1.36%	0.88%	1.79%
SMCF Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF	3.34%	3.91%	0.61%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFV and SMCF in my portfolio?

RFV and SMCF 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.

Which is riskier, RFV or SMCF?

RFV has higher volatility (4.28%) compared to SMCF (3.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs SMCF's -28.48%.

Which ETF is better, RFV or SMCF?

On 1-year performance, SMCF leads with 32.62% vs 21.60% for RFV. On fees, SMCF is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, SMCF has been the lower-risk option at 3.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFV or SMCF?

Over the 1-year period, SMCF has performed better with a 32.62% return vs 21.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFV or SMCF?

SMCF is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RFV.

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

SMCF has the higher dividend yield at 3.34%, compared with 1.70% for RFV.

What is the main difference between RFV and SMCF?

RFV tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while SMCF tracks Solactive US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFV and 0.29% for SMCF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMCF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.20), 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.