RZV vs. SMIG

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

RZV (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF) and SMIG (Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. RZV is passively managed, while SMIG is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RZV returned 16.77%/yr vs 13.23%/yr for SMIG. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. RZV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for SMIG.

Performance

RZV vs. SMIG - 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 Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG). 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 SMIG's 16.80% 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%

SMIG

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 1.10%
• 6M: 11.06%
• YTD: 16.80%
• 1Y: 17.18%
• 3Y*: 13.23%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.96%

*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)
RZV Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF	$1.90M	$1.80M	$1.00M
SMIG Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF	$7.52M	$7.59M	$8.51M

RZV vs. SMIG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
RZV Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF	28.27%	8.65%	5.06%	22.97%	-6.80%	4.30%
SMIG Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF	16.80%	0.78%	17.63%	13.62%	-11.83%	5.23%

Correlation

The correlation between RZV and SMIG is 0.73, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021	0.83

The correlation between RZV and SMIG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

RZV vs. SMIG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RZV	SMIG
Consumer Cyclical	23.9%	14.2%
Industrials	15.7%	19.1%
Technology	12.1%	10.8%
Consumer Defensive	10.4%	2.2%
Healthcare	8.8%	2.7%
Financial Services	7.7%	19.7%
Energy	7.4%	10.4%
Basic Materials	5.7%	2.0%
Real Estate	4.6%	9.7%
Communication Services	3.4%	2.2%
Utilities	0.4%	9.3%

Return for Risk

RZV vs. SMIG — 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

SMIG

SMIG Risk / Return Rank: 54
SMIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
SMIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
SMIG Omega Ratio Rank: 53
SMIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
SMIG Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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. SMIG - 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 Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG). 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	SMIG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	1.46	+0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.36	2.20	+1.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.26	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.85	2.03	+1.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.98	5.29	+7.69

RZV vs. SMIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RZV Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is higher than the SMIG Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RZV and SMIG, 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. SMIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RZV drawdown since its inception was -77.11%, which is greater than SMIG's maximum drawdown of -19.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RZV and SMIG.

Drawdown Indicators

	RZV	SMIG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-77.11%	-19.65%	-57.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.56%	-8.52%	-4.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.81%	-19.23%	-10.58%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.81%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-60.42%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-0.83%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.50%	-6.35%	-7.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.71%	3.25%	+0.46%

Volatility

RZV vs. SMIG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) has a higher volatility of 5.09% compared to Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG) at 3.19%. This indicates that RZV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SMIG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RZV	SMIG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.09%	3.19%	+1.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.81%	8.56%	+5.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.11%	11.82%	+8.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.09%	16.04%	+8.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.89%	16.04%	+10.85%

RZV vs. SMIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RZV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than SMIG's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

RZV vs. SMIG - Dividend Comparison

RZV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, less than SMIG's 1.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
SMIG Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF	1.65%	1.82%	1.75%	1.91%	2.00%	0.50%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RZV and SMIG in my portfolio?

RZV and SMIG have a correlation of 0.73, 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 SMIG?

RZV has higher volatility (5.09%) compared to SMIG (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RZV dropped -77.11% vs SMIG's -19.65%.

Which ETF is better, RZV or SMIG?

On 3-year performance, RZV leads with 16.77% vs 13.23% for SMIG. On fees, RZV is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, SMIG has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RZV or SMIG?

Over the 3-year period, RZV has performed better with a 16.77% return vs 13.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RZV or SMIG?

RZV is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SMIG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RZV or SMIG?

SMIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.65%, compared with 1.37% for RZV.

What is the main difference between RZV and SMIG?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Bahl & Gaynor. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RZV and 0.60% for SMIG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RZV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.46), 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.