RZV vs. HSGFX

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

RZV (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF) and HSGFX (Hussman Strategic Growth Fund) are both funds - RZV is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Value, while HSGFX is a Long-Short fund managed by Hussman Funds. Over the past 10 years, RZV returned 10.83%/yr vs -2.22%/yr for HSGFX. Their -0.37 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. RZV charges 0.35%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for HSGFX.

Performance

RZV vs. HSGFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) and Hussman Strategic Growth Fund (HSGFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RZV achieves a 28.27% return, which is significantly higher than HSGFX's -5.27% return. Over the past 10 years, RZV has outperformed HSGFX with an annualized return of 10.83%, while HSGFX has yielded a comparatively lower -2.22% annualized return.

RZV

• 1D: 1.82%
• 1M: 2.39%
• 6M: 16.91%
• YTD: 28.27%
• 1Y: 48.09%
• 3Y*: 16.77%
• 5Y*: 12.95%
• 10Y*: 10.83%
• ALL TIME*: 8.35%

HSGFX

• 1D: -0.92%
• 1M: 3.85%
• 6M: -3.58%
• YTD: -5.27%
• 1Y: -10.47%
• 3Y*: -2.65%
• 5Y*: -1.91%
• 10Y*: -2.22%
• ALL TIME*: 0.22%

*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)
HSGFX Hussman Strategic Growth Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
RZV Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF	$1.90M	$1.80M	$1.00M

RZV vs. HSGFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RZV Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF	28.27%	8.65%	5.06%	22.97%	-6.80%	45.95%	-3.88%	22.29%	-19.66%	1.25%
HSGFX Hussman Strategic Growth Fund	-5.27%	6.24%	-6.99%	-11.60%	17.33%	-0.23%	14.52%	-18.87%	8.78%	-12.72%

Correlation

The correlation between RZV and HSGFX is -0.25, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.25
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	-0.32
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	-0.38
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	-0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2006	-0.37

The correlation between RZV and HSGFX shifts across timeframes, from -0.38 (5 years) to -0.25 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

RZV vs. HSGFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

RZV

RZV Risk / Return Rank: 89
RZV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
RZV Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
RZV Omega Ratio Rank: 88
RZV Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
RZV Martin Ratio Rank: 86

HSGFX

HSGFX Risk / Return Rank: 1
HSGFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
HSGFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
HSGFX Omega Ratio Rank: 1
HSGFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
HSGFX Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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.

RZV vs. HSGFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) and Hussman Strategic Growth Fund (HSGFX). 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.

	RZV	HSGFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	-0.71	+3.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.36	-0.99	+4.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	0.89	+0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.85	-0.53	+4.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.98	-0.97	+13.95

RZV vs. HSGFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RZV Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is higher than the HSGFX Sharpe Ratio of -0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RZV and HSGFX, 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

RZV vs. HSGFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RZV drawdown since its inception was -77.11%, which is greater than HSGFX's maximum drawdown of -60.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RZV and HSGFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	RZV	HSGFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-77.11%	-60.61%	-16.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.56%	-17.20%	+4.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.81%	-24.52%	-5.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.81%	-24.52%	-5.29%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-60.42%	-30.86%	-29.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-54.87%	+53.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.50%	-27.04%	+13.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.71%	9.44%	-5.73%

Volatility

RZV vs. HSGFX - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) has a higher volatility of 5.09% compared to Hussman Strategic Growth Fund (HSGFX) at 3.49%. This indicates that RZV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HSGFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RZV	HSGFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.09%	3.49%	+1.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.81%	10.40%	+3.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.11%	12.89%	+7.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.09%	11.43%	+12.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.89%	10.90%	+15.99%

RZV vs. HSGFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

RZV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than HSGFX's 1.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

RZV vs. HSGFX - Dividend Comparison

RZV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, less than HSGFX's 2.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HSGFX Hussman Strategic Growth Fund	2.46%	2.33%	3.00%	3.10%	1.08%	0.42%	0.16%	1.84%	1.19%	0.50%	0.28%	0.56%
RZV Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF	1.37%	1.59%	1.14%	1.13%	1.43%	0.86%	0.63%	1.03%	2.03%	1.02%	0.46%	1.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RZV and HSGFX in my portfolio?

RZV and HSGFX have a correlation of -0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RZV or HSGFX?

RZV has higher volatility (5.09%) compared to HSGFX (3.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RZV dropped -77.11% vs HSGFX's -60.61%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RZV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs -0.71), 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.