RWL vs. SEIQ

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

RWL (Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF) and SEIQ (SEI Enhanced US Large Cap Quality Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWL is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index, while SEIQ is a Quality Factor fund actively managed by SEI. RWL is passively managed, while SEIQ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RWL returned 19.74%/yr vs 14.99%/yr for SEIQ. Their 0.80 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RWL charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for SEIQ.

Performance

RWL vs. SEIQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) and SEI Enhanced US Large Cap Quality Factor ETF (SEIQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWL achieves a 17.78% return, which is significantly higher than SEIQ's 8.95% return.

RWL

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 3.29%
• 6M: 12.79%
• YTD: 17.78%
• 1Y: 31.27%
• 3Y*: 19.74%
• 5Y*: 14.16%
• 10Y*: 14.21%
• ALL TIME*: 11.40%

SEIQ

• 1D: 0.36%
• 1M: 4.77%
• 6M: 8.79%
• YTD: 8.95%
• 1Y: 16.00%
• 3Y*: 14.99%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.55%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF	$41.49M	$35.69M	$32.90M
SEIQ SEI Enhanced US Large Cap Quality Factor ETF	$1.93M	$2.99M	$2.13M

RWL vs. SEIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF	17.78%	18.65%	16.45%	17.43%	-1.78%
SEIQ SEI Enhanced US Large Cap Quality Factor ETF	8.95%	12.51%	16.15%	22.66%	1.51%

Correlation

The correlation between RWL and SEIQ is 0.72, 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.	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 18, 2022	0.80

The correlation between RWL and SEIQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWL vs. SEIQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWL	SEIQ
Healthcare	19.3%	19.4%
Financial Services	15.4%	10.3%
Technology	13.8%	34.1%
Consumer Cyclical	12.4%	10.0%
Consumer Defensive	10.7%	13.1%
Industrials	9.5%	6.7%
Communication Services	7.5%	5.3%
Energy	5.9%	-
Utilities	2.6%	-
Basic Materials	2.0%	0.9%
Real Estate	0.9%	-

Return for Risk

RWL vs. SEIQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWL

RWL Risk / Return Rank: 95
RWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
RWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
RWL Omega Ratio Rank: 95
RWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
RWL Martin Ratio Rank: 94

SEIQ

SEIQ Risk / Return Rank: 47
SEIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
SEIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
SEIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 46
SEIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
SEIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

RWL vs. SEIQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) and SEI Enhanced US Large Cap Quality Factor ETF (SEIQ). 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.

	RWL	SEIQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.18	1.41	+1.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.39	2.02	+2.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.25	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.73	1.66	+3.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.57	6.30	+14.27

RWL vs. SEIQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWL Sharpe Ratio is 3.18, which is higher than the SEIQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWL and SEIQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RWL vs. SEIQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWL drawdown since its inception was -54.83%, which is greater than SEIQ's maximum drawdown of -14.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWL and SEIQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWL	SEIQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.83%	-14.87%	-39.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.64%	-9.66%	+3.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.39%	-14.27%	-0.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.49%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.04%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	0.00%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.39%	-2.68%	-3.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.52%	2.55%	-1.03%

Volatility

RWL vs. SEIQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) is 2.75%, while SEI Enhanced US Large Cap Quality Factor ETF (SEIQ) has a volatility of 4.18%. This indicates that RWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SEIQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWL	SEIQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.75%	4.18%	-1.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.24%	9.25%	-2.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.88%	11.50%	-1.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.46%	14.58%	-0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.80%	14.58%	+2.22%

RWL vs. SEIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWL has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than SEIQ's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWL vs. SEIQ - Dividend Comparison

RWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, more than SEIQ's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF	1.20%	1.35%	1.43%	1.60%	1.62%	1.35%	1.75%	1.87%	1.99%	1.60%	1.71%	1.97%
SEIQ SEI Enhanced US Large Cap Quality Factor ETF	0.88%	0.94%	0.97%	1.08%	0.83%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWL and SEIQ in my portfolio?

RWL and SEIQ have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RWL or SEIQ?

SEIQ has higher volatility (4.18%) compared to RWL (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWL dropped -54.83% vs SEIQ's -14.87%.

Which ETF is better, RWL or SEIQ?

On 3-year performance, RWL leads with 19.74% vs 14.99% for SEIQ. On fees, SEIQ is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, RWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWL or SEIQ?

Over the 3-year period, RWL has performed better with a 19.74% return vs 14.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWL or SEIQ?

SEIQ is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWL or SEIQ?

RWL has the higher dividend yield at 1.20%, compared with 0.88% for SEIQ.

What is the main difference between RWL and SEIQ?

RWL is categorized as S&P 500, while SEIQ is Quality Factor. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and SEI. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWL and 0.15% for SEIQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.18 vs 1.41), 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.