RZG vs. RFG
RZG (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF) and RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds from Invesco - RZG tracks the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth while RFG tracks the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RZG returned 11.02%/yr vs 10.92%/yr for RFG. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.
Performance
RZG vs. RFG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RZG achieves a 28.86% return, which is significantly higher than RFG's 20.26% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with RZG having a 11.02% annualized return and RFG not far behind at 10.92%.
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%
RFG
- 1D
- -0.43%
- 1M
- 2.32%
- YTD
- 20.26%
- 6M
- 17.58%
- 1Y
- 31.11%
- 3Y*
- 19.45%
- 5Y*
- 7.36%
- 10Y*
- 10.92%
RZG vs. RFG - 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% |
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 20.26% | 8.80% | 17.80% | 16.42% | -21.70% | 13.81% | 32.86% | 17.09% | -13.98% | 20.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between RZG and RFG is 0.85, 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 | 0.85 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2006 | 0.86 |
The correlation between RZG and RFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.
RZG vs. RFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RZG
RFG
Healthcare
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Healthcare
RZG
RFG
Technology
RZG
RFG
Industrials
RZG
RFG
Financial Services
RZG
RFG
Consumer Cyclical
RZG
RFG
Real Estate
RZG
RFG
Consumer Defensive
RZG
RFG
Communication Services
RZG
RFG
Energy
RZG
RFG
Basic Materials
RZG
RFG
Utilities
RZG
RFG
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. RFG — Risk / Return Rank
RZG
RFG
RZG vs. RFG - 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 S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). 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 | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.81 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.28 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.71 | 3.00 | +1.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.91 | 12.08 | +3.82 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RZG vs. RFG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RZG drawdown since its inception was -58.52%, which is greater than RFG's maximum drawdown of -51.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RZG and RFG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RZG | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.52% | -51.93% | -6.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.63% | -10.41% | +1.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.73% | -26.71% | +0.98% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.33% | -35.16% | -3.17% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -54.02% | -42.92% | -11.10% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.39% | +2.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.09% | -8.95% | -3.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.55% | 2.58% | -0.03% |
Volatility
RZG vs. RFG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) is 5.47%, while Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) has a volatility of 6.68%. This indicates that RZG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RZG | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.47% | 6.68% | -1.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.17% | 15.61% | -1.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.97% | 19.26% | -0.29% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.04% | 22.92% | +0.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.65% | 23.07% | +1.58% |
RZG vs. RFG - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both RZG and RFG have an expense ratio of 0.35%.
Dividends
RZG vs. RFG - Dividend Comparison
RZG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.44%, more than RFG's 0.14% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 0.14% | 0.43% | 0.38% | 0.99% | 0.78% | 0.05% | 0.27% | 0.64% | 0.76% | 0.66% | 0.35% | 0.61% |
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 RFG have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RFG has higher volatility (6.68%) compared to RZG (5.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RZG dropped -58.52% vs RFG's -51.93%.
On 10-year performance, RZG leads with 11.02% vs 10.92% for RFG. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. 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, RZG has performed better with a 11.02% return vs 10.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RZG and RFG have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.
RZG has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.14% for RFG.
RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth, while RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth.
RZG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.62), 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 RFG
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