PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RZV vs. RWJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RZV vs. RWJ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

RZV (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF) and RWJ (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds from Invesco - RZV tracks the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Value while RWJ tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RZV returned 11.03%/yr vs 13.60%/yr for RWJ. Their correlation of 0.92 means they have usually moved in the same direction. RZV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RWJ.

Performance

RZV vs. RWJ - 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 Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RZV having a 25.98% return and RWJ slightly lower at 25.74%. Over the past 10 years, RZV has underperformed RWJ with an annualized return of 11.03%, while RWJ has yielded a comparatively higher 13.60% annualized return.

RZV

1D
-0.19%
1M
0.56%
6M
16.49%
YTD
25.98%
1Y
45.45%
3Y*
15.81%
5Y*
12.00%
10Y*
11.03%
ALL TIME*
8.26%

RWJ

1D
-0.20%
1M
2.40%
6M
17.61%
YTD
25.74%
1Y
43.73%
3Y*
16.07%
5Y*
10.85%
10Y*
13.60%
ALL TIME*
12.54%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

RWJ

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF
$5.35M$5.27M$5.02M

RZV

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF
$2.11M$1.71M$997.82K

RZV vs. RWJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RZV
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF		25.98%8.65%5.06%22.97%-6.80%45.95%-3.88%22.29%-19.66%1.25%
RWJ
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF		25.74%7.75%11.81%16.21%-10.97%52.82%20.83%20.29%-16.95%5.30%

Correlation

The correlation between RZV and RWJ is 0.95, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.95

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.96

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.96

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 2008

0.92

The correlation between RZV and RWJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

RZV vs. RWJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
RZV
RWJ

Consumer Cyclical

23.9%
25.4%

Industrials

15.7%
15.3%

Technology

12.1%
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

10.4%
7.7%

Healthcare

8.8%
11.0%

Financial Services

7.7%
11.6%

Energy

7.4%
6.5%

Basic Materials

5.7%
4.7%

Real Estate

4.6%
4.1%

Communication Services

3.4%
2.6%

Utilities

0.4%
0.9%

Consumer Cyclical

RZV
23.9%
RWJ
25.4%

Industrials

RZV
15.7%
RWJ
15.3%

Technology

RZV
12.1%
RWJ
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

RZV
10.4%
RWJ
7.7%

Healthcare

RZV
8.8%
RWJ
11.0%

Financial Services

RZV
7.7%
RWJ
11.6%

Energy

RZV
7.4%
RWJ
6.5%

Basic Materials

RZV
5.7%
RWJ
4.7%

Real Estate

RZV
4.6%
RWJ
4.1%

Communication Services

RZV
3.4%
RWJ
2.6%

Utilities

RZV
0.4%
RWJ
0.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF

Often compared with RZV:
RZV vs. AVUVRZV vs. RPVRZV vs. VBRRZV vs. PSCCRZV vs. IJRRZV vs. SPYRZV vs. VOO
Often compared with RWJ:
RWJ vs. AVUVXRWJ vs. XSVMRWJ vs. RWKRWJ vs. CALFRWJ vs. RFVRWJ vs. FSMDRWJ vs. EWMC

Return for Risk

RZV vs. RWJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
RZV
RZV Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
RZV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RZV Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
RZV Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
RZV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
RZV Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
RWJ
RWJ Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
RWJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWJ Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
RWJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWJ Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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. RWJ - 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 Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ). 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.

RZVRWJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.10
2.16

-0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.97
3.12

-0.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.37

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.37

3.57

-0.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.37

11.98

-0.61

RZV vs. RWJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RZV Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the RWJ Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RZV and RWJ, 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...

Drawdowns

RZV vs. RWJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RZV drawdown since its inception was -77.11%, which is greater than RWJ's maximum drawdown of -55.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RZV and RWJ.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RZVRWJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-77.11%

-55.97%

-21.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.56%

-11.31%

-1.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.81%

-29.29%

-0.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.81%

-29.29%

-0.52%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-60.42%

-51.33%

-9.09%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.74%

-1.74%

-1.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.50%

-9.16%

-4.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.72%

3.36%

+0.36%

Volatility

RZV vs. RWJ - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) has a higher volatility of 4.89% compared to Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) at 4.09%. This indicates that RZV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RZVRWJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.89%

4.09%

+0.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.71%

12.15%

+1.56%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.20%

18.69%

+1.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.07%

23.49%

+0.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.89%

26.06%

+0.83%

RZV vs. RWJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

RZV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than RWJ's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

RZV vs. RWJ - Dividend Comparison

RZV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, more than RWJ's 1.00% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RWJ
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF		1.00%1.11%1.15%1.34%1.02%0.61%0.89%1.22%1.44%1.11%0.60%0.74%
RZV
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF		1.40%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

With a correlation of 0.95, RZV and RWJ 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.

RZV has higher volatility (4.89%) compared to RWJ (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RZV dropped -77.11% vs RWJ's -55.97%.

On 10-year performance, RWJ leads with 13.60% vs 11.03% for RZV. On fees, RZV is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RWJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RWJ has performed better with a 13.60% return vs 11.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RZV is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWJ.

RZV has the higher dividend yield at 1.40%, compared with 1.00% for RWJ.

RZV tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Value, while RWJ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RZV and 0.39% for RWJ.

RWJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 2.10), 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 RZV and RWJ

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