RWJ vs. SAA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RWJ (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF) and SAA (ProShares Ultra SmallCap600) are both exchange-traded funds - RWJ is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index, while SAA is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWJ returned 13.02%/yr vs 11.43%/yr for SAA. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RWJ charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for SAA.

Performance

RWJ vs. SAA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) and ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWJ achieves a 15.88% return, which is significantly lower than SAA's 28.22% return. Over the past 10 years, RWJ has outperformed SAA with an annualized return of 13.02%, while SAA has yielded a comparatively lower 11.43% annualized return.

RWJ

• 1D: -1.07%
• 1M: 1.90%
• YTD: 15.88%
• 6M: 14.97%
• 1Y: 36.55%
• 3Y*: 16.43%
• 5Y*: 7.73%
• 10Y*: 13.02%

SAA

• 1D: -1.69%
• 1M: 3.02%
• YTD: 28.22%
• 6M: 25.09%
• 1Y: 58.28%
• 3Y*: 17.67%
• 5Y*: 1.22%
• 10Y*: 11.43%

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

RWJ vs. SAA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	15.88%	7.75%	11.81%	16.21%	-10.97%	52.82%	20.83%	20.29%	-16.95%	5.30%
SAA ProShares Ultra SmallCap600	28.22%	0.29%	5.60%	21.32%	-36.17%	51.77%	-1.79%	42.39%	-23.00%	23.94%

Correlation

The correlation between RWJ and SAA is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2008	0.88

The correlation between RWJ and SAA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWJ vs. SAA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWJ	SAA
Consumer Cyclical	23.9%	13.4%
Industrials	16.2%	15.5%
Healthcare	11.2%	11.0%
Financial Services	11.0%	16.9%
Technology	9.9%	15.5%
Energy	7.4%	5.9%
Consumer Defensive	6.9%	3.5%
Basic Materials	5.2%	5.1%
Real Estate	4.0%	7.7%
Communication Services	3.3%	3.6%
Utilities	0.9%	2.0%

Return for Risk

RWJ vs. SAA — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWJ

RWJ Risk / Return Rank: 57
RWJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
RWJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
RWJ Omega Ratio Rank: 52
RWJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
RWJ Martin Ratio Rank: 58

SAA

SAA Risk / Return Rank: 52
SAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
SAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
SAA Omega Ratio Rank: 42
SAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
SAA Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

RWJ vs. SAA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) and ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA). 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.

	RWJ	SAA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	1.64	+0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.75	2.31	+0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.27	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.25	3.22	+0.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.39	10.38	+0.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RWJ vs. SAA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the SAA Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWJ and SAA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RWJ	SAA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	1.64	+0.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33	0.03	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	0.25	+0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	0.18	+0.28

Drawdowns

RWJ vs. SAA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWJ drawdown since its inception was -55.97%, smaller than the maximum SAA drawdown of -87.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWJ and SAA.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWJ	SAA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.97%	-87.39%	+31.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.31%	-18.21%	+6.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.29%	-50.84%	+21.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.29%	-55.37%	+26.08%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.33%	-74.54%	+23.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.07%	-4.35%	+3.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.24%	-27.42%	+18.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.53%	5.63%	-2.10%

Volatility

RWJ vs. SAA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) is 4.64%, while ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) has a volatility of 8.56%. This indicates that RWJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SAA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWJ	SAA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.64%	8.56%	-3.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.29%	23.89%	-11.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.40%	35.92%	-16.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.71%	43.54%	-19.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.14%	46.13%	-19.99%

RWJ vs. SAA - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWJ has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than SAA's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWJ vs. SAA - Dividend Comparison

RWJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, more than SAA's 0.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	1.01%	1.11%	1.15%	1.34%	1.02%	0.61%	0.89%	1.22%	1.44%	1.11%	0.60%	0.74%
SAA ProShares Ultra SmallCap600	0.79%	1.05%	1.36%	0.88%	0.46%	0.00%	0.03%	0.35%	0.27%	0.00%	0.14%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWJ and SAA in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, RWJ and SAA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, RWJ or SAA?

SAA has higher volatility (8.56%) compared to RWJ (4.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWJ dropped -55.97% vs SAA's -87.39%.

Which ETF is better, RWJ or SAA?

On 10-year performance, RWJ leads with 13.02% vs 11.43% for SAA. On fees, RWJ is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RWJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWJ or SAA?

Over the 10-year period, RWJ has performed better with a 13.02% return vs 11.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWJ or SAA?

RWJ is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SAA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWJ or SAA?

RWJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.79% for SAA.

What is the main difference between RWJ and SAA?

RWJ is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while SAA is Leveraged Equities. RWJ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index, while SAA tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWJ and 0.95% for SAA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 1.64), 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.