PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RPG vs. XLG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RPG vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RPG achieves a 22.47% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 4.68% return. Over the past 10 years, RPG has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of 13.52%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 16.44% annualized return.


RPG

1D
2.09%
1M
-4.47%
6M
15.17%
YTD
22.47%
1Y
24.43%
3Y*
22.95%
5Y*
8.30%
10Y*
13.52%
ALL TIME*
11.65%

XLG

1D
1.74%
1M
1.81%
6M
4.68%
YTD
4.68%
1Y
17.86%
3Y*
21.61%
5Y*
14.02%
10Y*
16.44%
ALL TIME*
11.40%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$42.21M$42.12M$41.16M
$59.56M$59.06M$102.51M

RPG vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RPG
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF
22.47%13.41%28.23%8.04%-27.55%29.40%29.34%28.34%-4.53%26.20%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
4.68%19.51%33.49%38.16%-24.29%30.77%24.15%32.04%-3.59%23.04%

Correlation

The correlation between RPG and XLG is 0.71, 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.

0.71

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

0.76

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

0.81

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

0.82

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

0.83

The correlation between RPG and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.83 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RPG vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RPG
XLG

Technology

47.7%
49.8%

Industrials

15.7%
1.9%

Consumer Cyclical

14.4%
9.3%

Communication Services

7.0%
13.0%

Healthcare

6.2%
6.8%

Financial Services

5.0%
10.3%

Energy

1.5%
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

1.1%
5.1%

Basic Materials

1.1%
0.6%

Real Estate

1.0%

-

Utilities

1.0%
0.7%

Technology

RPG
47.7%
XLG
49.8%

Industrials

RPG
15.7%
XLG
1.9%

Consumer Cyclical

RPG
14.4%
XLG
9.3%

Communication Services

RPG
7.0%
XLG
13.0%

Healthcare

RPG
6.2%
XLG
6.8%

Financial Services

RPG
5.0%
XLG
10.3%

Energy

RPG
1.5%
XLG
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

RPG
1.1%
XLG
5.1%

Basic Materials

RPG
1.1%
XLG
0.6%

Real Estate

RPG
1.0%
XLG

-

Utilities

RPG
1.0%
XLG
0.7%

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

RPG vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

RPG
RPG Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
RPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
RPG Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
RPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
RPG Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

XLG
XLG Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

RPG vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.


RPGXLGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.22

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.46

1.44

+0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.95

4.49

+1.46

RPG vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RPG Sharpe Ratio is 0.99, which is comparable to the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RPG and XLG, 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

RPG vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RPG drawdown since its inception was -53.27%, roughly equal to the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RPG and XLG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RPGXLGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-53.27%

-52.39%

-0.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.84%

-12.41%

-4.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.75%

-20.70%

-4.05%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.59%

-28.02%

-7.57%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.58%

-30.46%

-6.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.54%

-4.09%

-6.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.82%

-7.62%

-1.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.12%

3.98%

+0.14%

Volatility

RPG vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) has a higher volatility of 10.41% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 5.30%. This indicates that RPG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RPGXLGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.41%

5.30%

+5.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.12%

11.66%

+10.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.92%

14.73%

+10.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.43%

18.91%

+5.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.18%

18.93%

+4.25%

RPG vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RPG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

RPG vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

RPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than XLG's 0.64% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RPG
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF
0.16%0.24%0.25%1.44%0.74%0.00%0.46%0.83%0.47%0.56%0.43%0.73%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
0.64%0.64%0.72%0.97%1.34%0.94%1.25%1.58%2.00%1.85%2.00%2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions


RPG and XLG have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RPG has higher volatility (10.41%) compared to XLG (5.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RPG dropped -53.27% vs XLG's -52.39%.

On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 16.44% vs 13.52% for RPG. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 5.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XLG has performed better with a 16.44% return vs 13.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RPG.

XLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.64%, compared with 0.16% for RPG.

RPG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. RPG tracks S&P 500 Pure Growth Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RPG and 0.20% for XLG.

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.22 vs 0.99), 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 RPG and XLG

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