RWK vs. VFMV
RWK (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF) and VFMV (Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWK is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Revenue-Weighted Index, while VFMV is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Vanguard. RWK is passively managed, while VFMV is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, RWK returned 10.58%/yr vs 9.52%/yr for VFMV. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RWK charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFMV.
Performance
RWK vs. VFMV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RWK achieves a 12.60% return, which is significantly higher than VFMV's 7.46% return.
RWK
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- 1.42%
- YTD
- 12.60%
- 6M
- 12.51%
- 1Y
- 26.47%
- 3Y*
- 16.89%
- 5Y*
- 10.58%
- 10Y*
- 12.66%
VFMV
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- 0.03%
- YTD
- 7.46%
- 6M
- 7.72%
- 1Y
- 11.60%
- 3Y*
- 13.97%
- 5Y*
- 9.52%
- 10Y*
- —
RWK vs. VFMV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF | 12.60% | 10.27% | 11.94% | 23.76% | -8.19% | 34.31% | 11.06% | 28.20% | -13.55% |
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF | 7.46% | 10.52% | 16.91% | 8.86% | -5.73% | 20.75% | -0.19% | 27.26% | -1.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between RWK and VFMV is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 16, 2018 | 0.74 |
The correlation between RWK and VFMV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.
RWK vs. VFMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RWK
VFMV
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Healthcare
Real Estate
Utilities
Communication Services
Industrials
RWK
VFMV
Consumer Cyclical
RWK
VFMV
Technology
RWK
VFMV
Financial Services
RWK
VFMV
Consumer Defensive
RWK
VFMV
Energy
RWK
VFMV
Basic Materials
RWK
VFMV
-
Healthcare
RWK
VFMV
Real Estate
RWK
VFMV
Utilities
RWK
VFMV
Communication Services
RWK
VFMV
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. VFMV — Risk / Return Rank
RWK
VFMV
RWK vs. VFMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV). 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 | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.47 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.23 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.39 | 1.94 | +0.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.67 | 7.57 | +0.09 |
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 | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.60 | 1.32 | +0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 | 0.81 | -0.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.55 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.68 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
RWK vs. VFMV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RWK drawdown since its inception was -56.49%, which is greater than VFMV's maximum drawdown of -33.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWK and VFMV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RWK | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.49% | -33.64% | -22.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.14% | -6.00% | -5.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.58% | -10.35% | -14.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.58% | -15.41% | -9.17% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.20% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.99% | -2.00% | +1.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.55% | -3.63% | -3.92% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.46% | 1.53% | +1.93% |
Volatility
RWK vs. VFMV - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) has a higher volatility of 4.08% compared to Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) at 2.21%. This indicates that RWK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VFMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RWK | VFMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.08% | 2.21% | +1.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.88% | 6.37% | +5.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.67% | 8.83% | +7.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.13% | 11.75% | +9.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.95% | 14.25% | +8.70% |
RWK vs. VFMV - Expense Ratio Comparison
RWK has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMV's 0.13% expense ratio.
Dividends
RWK vs. VFMV - Dividend Comparison
RWK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, less than VFMV's 1.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWK Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF | 1.13% | 1.25% | 1.11% | 1.05% | 1.18% | 0.85% | 0.96% | 1.09% | 1.22% | 0.99% | 1.30% | 0.92% |
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF | 1.95% | 2.12% | 1.46% | 2.20% | 2.08% | 1.31% | 2.14% | 2.43% | 2.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RWK and VFMV have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RWK has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to VFMV (2.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWK dropped -56.49% vs VFMV's -33.64%.
On 5-year performance, RWK leads with 10.58% vs 9.52% for VFMV. On fees, VFMV is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, VFMV has been the lower-risk option at 2.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, RWK has performed better with a 10.58% return vs 9.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VFMV is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWK.
VFMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.95%, compared with 1.13% for RWK.
RWK is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while VFMV is Mid Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWK and 0.13% for VFMV.
RWK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 1.32), 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.
Find the right allocation for RWK and VFMV
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