RWK vs. RB
RWK (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF) and RB (ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWK is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index, while RB is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Russell 2000. Both are passively managed. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RWK charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RB.
Performance
RWK vs. RB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RWK achieves a 13.73% return, which is significantly higher than RB's 6.95% return.
RWK
- 1D
- 1.10%
- 1M
- 3.22%
- YTD
- 13.73%
- 6M
- 14.17%
- 1Y
- 30.18%
- 3Y*
- 18.14%
- 5Y*
- 10.78%
- 10Y*
- 12.83%
RB
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 1.63%
- YTD
- 6.95%
- 6M
- 9.59%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RWK vs. RB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF | 13.73% | 9.01% |
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 6.95% | 10.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between RWK and RB is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2025 | 0.69 |
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
RWK vs. RB — Risk / Return Rank
RWK
RB
RWK vs. RB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). 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 | RB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.82 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.70 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.62 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.44 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RWK | RB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.82 | — | — |
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 | 3.19 | -2.72 |
Drawdowns
RWK vs. RB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RWK drawdown since its inception was -56.49%, which is greater than RB's maximum drawdown of -1.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWK and RB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RWK | RB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.49% | -1.70% | -54.79% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.14% | — | — |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.30% | +0.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.56% | -0.41% | -7.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.46% | — | — |
Volatility
RWK vs. RB - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RWK | RB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.93% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.87% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.72% | 6.21% | +10.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.13% | 6.21% | +14.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.96% | 6.21% | +16.75% |
RWK vs. RB - Expense Ratio Comparison
RWK has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than RB's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
RWK vs. RB - Dividend Comparison
RWK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, less than RB's 1.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 1.99% | 1.78% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
RWK and RB have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RWK is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RWK is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RB.
RB has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 1.12% for RWK.
RWK is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while RB is Defined Outcome. RWK tracks S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index, while RB tracks Russell 2000. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWK and 0.58% for RB.
Find the right allocation for RWK and RB
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