RWK vs. FESM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RWK (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF) and FESM (Fidelity Enhanced Small Cap ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds. RWK is passively managed, while FESM is actively managed. Over the past year, RWK returned 28.13% vs 46.73% for FESM. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RWK charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for FESM.

Performance

RWK vs. FESM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) and Fidelity Enhanced Small Cap ETF (FESM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWK achieves a 13.47% return, which is significantly lower than FESM's 19.64% return.

RWK

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 4.38%
• YTD: 13.47%
• 6M: 12.75%
• 1Y: 28.13%
• 3Y*: 18.05%
• 5Y*: 10.64%
• 10Y*: 12.80%

FESM

• 1D: -1.51%
• 1M: 3.13%
• YTD: 19.64%
• 6M: 19.11%
• 1Y: 46.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RWK vs. FESM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF	13.47%	10.27%	11.94%	9.66%
FESM Fidelity Enhanced Small Cap ETF	19.64%	17.88%	16.22%	12.19%

Correlation

The correlation between RWK and FESM is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2023	0.88

The correlation between RWK and FESM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWK vs. FESM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWK	FESM
Industrials	21.8%	19.1%
Consumer Cyclical	20.7%	7.4%
Technology	14.0%	21.6%
Financial Services	13.1%	14.8%
Consumer Defensive	11.3%	1.4%
Energy	5.3%	7.2%
Basic Materials	4.7%	3.5%
Healthcare	4.0%	15.7%
Real Estate	2.8%	4.2%
Utilities	1.6%	2.0%
Communication Services	0.7%	3.1%

Return for Risk

RWK vs. FESM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWK

RWK Risk / Return Rank: 49
RWK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
RWK Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
RWK Omega Ratio Rank: 46
RWK Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
RWK Martin Ratio Rank: 48

FESM

FESM Risk / Return Rank: 76
FESM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
FESM Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FESM Omega Ratio Rank: 66
FESM Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
FESM Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

RWK vs. FESM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) and Fidelity Enhanced Small Cap ETF (FESM). 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.

	RWK	FESM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	2.48	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	3.34	-0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.41	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.54	4.61	-2.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.15	16.60	-8.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RWK vs. FESM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWK Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is lower than the FESM Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWK and FESM, 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

	RWK	FESM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.70	2.48	-0.78
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.56	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.48	1.29	-0.81

Drawdowns

RWK vs. FESM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWK drawdown since its inception was -56.49%, which is greater than FESM's maximum drawdown of -26.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWK and FESM.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWK	FESM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.49%	-26.93%	-29.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.14%	-10.18%	-0.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.58%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.58%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.23%	-1.59%	+1.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.55%	-4.79%	-2.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	2.82%	+0.64%

Volatility

RWK vs. FESM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) is 4.70%, while Fidelity Enhanced Small Cap ETF (FESM) has a volatility of 5.64%. This indicates that RWK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FESM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWK	FESM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.70%	5.64%	-0.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.86%	13.32%	-1.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.70%	18.98%	-2.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.13%	21.26%	-0.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.95%	21.26%	+1.69%

RWK vs. FESM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWK has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than FESM's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWK vs. FESM - Dividend Comparison

RWK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, more than FESM's 0.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FESM Fidelity Enhanced Small Cap ETF	0.53%	0.82%	1.08%	0.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF	1.12%	1.25%	1.11%	1.05%	1.18%	0.85%	0.96%	1.09%	1.22%	0.99%	1.30%	0.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWK and FESM in my portfolio?

RWK and FESM have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RWK or FESM?

FESM has higher volatility (5.64%) compared to RWK (4.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWK dropped -56.49% vs FESM's -26.93%.

Which ETF is better, RWK or FESM?

On 1-year performance, FESM leads with 46.73% vs 28.13% for RWK. On fees, FESM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, RWK has been the lower-risk option at 4.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWK or FESM?

Over the 1-year period, FESM has performed better with a 46.73% return vs 28.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWK or FESM?

FESM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWK or FESM?

RWK has the higher dividend yield at 1.12%, compared with 0.53% for FESM.

What is the main difference between RWK and FESM?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWK and 0.28% for FESM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FESM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 1.70), 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.