PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RZG vs. SLYG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RZG vs. SLYG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) and SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Growth ETF (SLYG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RZG achieves a 18.15% return, which is significantly higher than SLYG's 15.50% return. Over the past 10 years, RZG has underperformed SLYG with an annualized return of 9.65%, while SLYG has yielded a comparatively higher 10.83% annualized return.


RZG

1D
-0.14%
1M
-0.10%
YTD
18.15%
6M
16.98%
1Y
30.70%
3Y*
17.12%
5Y*
4.85%
10Y*
9.65%

SLYG

1D
-0.58%
1M
0.98%
YTD
15.50%
6M
13.61%
1Y
26.20%
3Y*
14.46%
5Y*
5.49%
10Y*
10.83%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RZG vs. SLYG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RZG
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF
18.15%10.22%9.84%19.15%-29.00%21.01%17.76%14.25%-8.70%19.18%
SLYG
SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Growth ETF
15.50%5.20%9.38%17.27%-21.26%22.42%19.48%20.97%-4.20%14.62%

Correlation

The correlation between RZG and SLYG is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.97

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.97

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.97

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 8, 2006

0.91

The correlation between RZG and SLYG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

RZG vs. SLYG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RZG
SLYG

Healthcare

22.0%
14.4%

Industrials

18.2%
19.5%

Technology

16.8%
20.1%

Financial Services

15.0%
13.9%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
10.4%

Real Estate

7.6%
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

5.9%
2.8%

Energy

3.0%
5.1%

Communication Services

1.9%
2.8%

Basic Materials

0.4%
2.8%

Utilities

0.4%
1.9%

Healthcare

RZG
22.0%
SLYG
14.4%

Industrials

RZG
18.2%
SLYG
19.5%

Technology

RZG
16.8%
SLYG
20.1%

Financial Services

RZG
15.0%
SLYG
13.9%

Consumer Cyclical

RZG
8.8%
SLYG
10.4%

Real Estate

RZG
7.6%
SLYG
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

RZG
5.9%
SLYG
2.8%

Energy

RZG
3.0%
SLYG
5.1%

Communication Services

RZG
1.9%
SLYG
2.8%

Basic Materials

RZG
0.4%
SLYG
2.8%

Utilities

RZG
0.4%
SLYG
1.9%

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. SLYG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

RZG
RZG Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
RZG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RZG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
RZG Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
RZG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
RZG Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

SLYG
SLYG Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
SLYG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SLYG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
SLYG Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
SLYG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
SLYG Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

RZG vs. SLYG - 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 SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Growth ETF (SLYG). 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.


RZGSLYGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.26

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.58

2.89

+0.68

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.94

10.11

+1.83

RZG vs. SLYG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RZG Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is comparable to the SLYG Sharpe Ratio of 1.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RZG and SLYG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RZGSLYGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.66

1.50

+0.16

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.21

0.26

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.39

0.48

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

0.31

+0.07

Drawdowns

RZG vs. SLYG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RZG drawdown since its inception was -58.52%, smaller than the maximum SLYG drawdown of -62.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RZG and SLYG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RZGSLYGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.52%

-62.15%

+3.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.63%

-9.10%

+0.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.73%

-27.39%

+1.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.33%

-29.18%

-9.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-54.02%

-41.86%

-12.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.92%

-1.42%

-0.50%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.13%

-14.55%

+2.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.58%

2.60%

-0.02%

Volatility

RZG vs. SLYG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) and SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Growth ETF (SLYG) have volatilities of 4.68% and 4.59%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RZGSLYGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.68%

4.59%

+0.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.57%

12.47%

+1.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.57%

17.57%

+1.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.97%

21.51%

+1.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.64%

22.74%

+1.90%

RZG vs. SLYG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RZG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than SLYG's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

RZG vs. SLYG - Dividend Comparison

RZG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, less than SLYG's 0.71% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RZG
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF
0.42%0.37%0.95%1.43%1.59%0.22%0.49%0.70%0.46%0.44%0.65%0.70%
SLYG
SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Growth ETF
0.71%0.86%1.22%1.18%1.18%0.68%0.71%1.08%1.06%4.74%1.13%5.75%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.97, RZG and SLYG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

RZG has higher volatility (4.68%) compared to SLYG (4.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RZG dropped -58.52% vs SLYG's -62.15%.

On 10-year performance, SLYG leads with 10.83% vs 9.65% for RZG. On fees, SLYG is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SLYG has performed better with a 10.83% return vs 9.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SLYG is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RZG.

SLYG has the higher dividend yield at 0.71%, compared with 0.42% for RZG.

RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth, while SLYG tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RZG and 0.15% for SLYG.

RZG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 1.50), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RZG and SLYG

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