RZG vs. DWAS
RZG (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF) and DWAS (Invesco DWA SmallCap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RZG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth, while DWAS is a Momentum fund tracking the Dorsey Wright SmallCap Technical Leaders Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RZG returned 11.02%/yr vs 13.84%/yr for DWAS. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RZG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for DWAS.
Performance
RZG vs. DWAS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RZG achieves a 28.86% return, which is significantly higher than DWAS's 24.45% return. Over the past 10 years, RZG has underperformed DWAS with an annualized return of 11.02%, while DWAS has yielded a comparatively higher 13.84% annualized return.
RZG
- 1D
- 1.10%
- 1M
- 9.84%
- YTD
- 28.86%
- 6M
- 24.63%
- 1Y
- 40.41%
- 3Y*
- 20.79%
- 5Y*
- 6.19%
- 10Y*
- 11.02%
DWAS
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- 6.03%
- YTD
- 24.45%
- 6M
- 20.91%
- 1Y
- 43.18%
- 3Y*
- 17.49%
- 5Y*
- 6.84%
- 10Y*
- 13.84%
RZG vs. DWAS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RZG Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF | 28.86% | 10.22% | 9.84% | 19.15% | -29.00% | 21.01% | 17.76% | 14.25% | -8.70% | 19.18% |
DWAS Invesco DWA SmallCap Momentum ETF | 24.45% | 6.09% | 9.81% | 16.88% | -18.51% | 19.75% | 32.32% | 31.39% | -10.68% | 20.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between RZG and DWAS is 0.83, 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 | 0.83 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 19, 2012 | 0.89 |
The correlation between RZG and DWAS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.
RZG vs. DWAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RZG
DWAS
Healthcare
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Healthcare
RZG
DWAS
Technology
RZG
DWAS
Industrials
RZG
DWAS
Financial Services
RZG
DWAS
Consumer Cyclical
RZG
DWAS
Real Estate
RZG
DWAS
Consumer Defensive
RZG
DWAS
Communication Services
RZG
DWAS
Energy
RZG
DWAS
Basic Materials
RZG
DWAS
Utilities
RZG
DWAS
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
RZG vs. DWAS — Risk / Return Rank
RZG
DWAS
RZG vs. DWAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) and Invesco DWA SmallCap Momentum ETF (DWAS). 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.
| RZG | DWAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.30 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.71 | 4.33 | +0.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.91 | 13.95 | +1.96 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RZG vs. DWAS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RZG drawdown since its inception was -58.52%, which is greater than DWAS's maximum drawdown of -46.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RZG and DWAS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RZG | DWAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.52% | -46.16% | -12.36% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.63% | -10.02% | +1.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.73% | -33.83% | +8.10% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.33% | -33.83% | -4.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -54.02% | -46.16% | -7.86% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.13% | +2.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.09% | -10.27% | -1.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.55% | 3.11% | -0.56% |
Volatility
RZG vs. DWAS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) is 5.47%, while Invesco DWA SmallCap Momentum ETF (DWAS) has a volatility of 8.91%. This indicates that RZG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DWAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RZG | DWAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.47% | 8.91% | -3.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.17% | 18.07% | -3.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.97% | 23.94% | -4.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.04% | 25.85% | -2.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.65% | 26.69% | -2.04% |
RZG vs. DWAS - Expense Ratio Comparison
RZG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than DWAS's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
RZG vs. DWAS - Dividend Comparison
RZG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.44%, while DWAS has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DWAS Invesco DWA SmallCap Momentum ETF | 0.00% | 0.07% | 0.79% | 1.42% | 0.81% | 0.16% | 0.21% | 0.13% | 0.04% | 0.20% | 0.52% | 0.19% |
RZG Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF | 0.44% | 0.37% | 0.95% | 1.43% | 1.59% | 0.22% | 0.49% | 0.70% | 0.46% | 0.44% | 0.65% | 0.70% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RZG and DWAS have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DWAS has higher volatility (8.91%) compared to RZG (5.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RZG dropped -58.52% vs DWAS's -46.16%.
On 10-year performance, DWAS leads with 13.84% vs 11.02% for RZG. On fees, RZG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RZG has been the lower-risk option at 5.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, DWAS has performed better with a 13.84% return vs 11.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RZG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for DWAS.
RZG has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.00% for DWAS.
RZG is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while DWAS is Momentum. RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth, while DWAS tracks Dorsey Wright SmallCap Technical Leaders Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RZG and 0.60% for DWAS.
RZG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.81), 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 RZG and DWAS
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