SAA vs. RWJ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SAA (ProShares Ultra SmallCap600) and RWJ (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SAA is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Index (200%), while RWJ is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SAA returned 11.43%/yr vs 13.02%/yr for RWJ. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SAA charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RWJ.

Performance

SAA vs. RWJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SAA achieves a 28.22% return, which is significantly higher than RWJ's 15.88% return. Over the past 10 years, SAA has underperformed RWJ with an annualized return of 11.43%, while RWJ has yielded a comparatively higher 13.02% annualized return.

SAA

• 1D: -1.69%
• 1M: 3.02%
• YTD: 28.22%
• 6M: 25.09%
• 1Y: 58.28%
• 3Y*: 17.67%
• 5Y*: 1.22%
• 10Y*: 11.43%

RWJ

• 1D: -1.07%
• 1M: 1.90%
• YTD: 15.88%
• 6M: 14.97%
• 1Y: 36.55%
• 3Y*: 16.43%
• 5Y*: 7.73%
• 10Y*: 13.02%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SAA vs. RWJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SAA ProShares Ultra SmallCap600	28.22%	0.29%	5.60%	21.32%	-36.17%	51.77%	-1.79%	42.39%	-23.00%	23.94%
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	15.88%	7.75%	11.81%	16.21%	-10.97%	52.82%	20.83%	20.29%	-16.95%	5.30%

Correlation

The correlation between SAA and RWJ is 0.96 - 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	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2008	0.88

The correlation between SAA and RWJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

SAA vs. RWJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SAA	RWJ
Financial Services	16.9%	11.0%
Industrials	15.5%	16.2%
Technology	15.5%	9.9%
Consumer Cyclical	13.4%	23.9%
Healthcare	11.0%	11.2%
Real Estate	7.7%	4.0%
Energy	5.9%	7.4%
Basic Materials	5.1%	5.2%
Communication Services	3.6%	3.3%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	6.9%
Utilities	2.0%	0.9%

Return for Risk

SAA vs. RWJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SAA

SAA Risk / Return Rank: 52
SAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
SAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
SAA Omega Ratio Rank: 42
SAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
SAA Martin Ratio Rank: 59

RWJ

RWJ Risk / Return Rank: 57
RWJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
RWJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
RWJ Omega Ratio Rank: 52
RWJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
RWJ Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

SAA vs. RWJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) 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.

	SAA	RWJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.64	1.90	-0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.31	2.75	-0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.33	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.22	3.25	-0.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.38	10.39	-0.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SAA vs. RWJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAA Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the RWJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SAA 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SAA	RWJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.64	1.90	-0.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.03	0.33	-0.30
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.25	0.50	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.18	0.46	-0.28

Drawdowns

SAA vs. RWJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SAA drawdown since its inception was -87.39%, which is greater than RWJ's maximum drawdown of -55.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAA and RWJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SAA	RWJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.39%	-55.97%	-31.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.21%	-11.31%	-6.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-50.84%	-29.29%	-21.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.37%	-29.29%	-26.08%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-74.54%	-51.33%	-23.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.35%	-1.07%	-3.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.42%	-9.24%	-18.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.63%	3.53%	+2.10%

Volatility

SAA vs. RWJ - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) has a higher volatility of 8.56% compared to Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) at 4.64%. This indicates that SAA'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.

Volatility by Period

	SAA	RWJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.56%	4.64%	+3.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.89%	12.29%	+11.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.92%	19.40%	+16.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.54%	23.71%	+19.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.13%	26.14%	+19.99%

SAA vs. RWJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

SAA has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than RWJ's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

SAA vs. RWJ - Dividend Comparison

SAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.79%, less than RWJ's 1.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	1.01%	1.11%	1.15%	1.34%	1.02%	0.61%	0.89%	1.22%	1.44%	1.11%	0.60%	0.74%
SAA ProShares Ultra SmallCap600	0.79%	1.05%	1.36%	0.88%	0.46%	0.00%	0.03%	0.35%	0.27%	0.00%	0.14%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SAA and RWJ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, SAA 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.

Which is riskier, SAA or RWJ?

SAA has higher volatility (8.56%) compared to RWJ (4.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SAA dropped -87.39% vs RWJ's -55.97%.

Which ETF is better, SAA or RWJ?

On 10-year performance, RWJ leads with 13.02% vs 11.43% for SAA. On fees, RWJ is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RWJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SAA or RWJ?

Over the 10-year period, RWJ has performed better with a 13.02% return vs 11.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SAA or RWJ?

RWJ is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SAA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SAA or RWJ?

RWJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.79% for SAA.

What is the main difference between SAA and RWJ?

SAA is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while RWJ is Small Cap Value Equities. SAA tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Index (200%), while RWJ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for SAA and 0.39% for RWJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 1.64), 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.