SAWS vs. RFG
SAWS (AAM Sawgrass U.S. Small Cap Quality Growth ETF) and RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SAWS is a Quality Factor fund actively managed by AAM, while RFG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. SAWS is actively managed, while RFG is passively managed. Over the past year, SAWS returned 27.20% vs 19.95% for RFG. Their correlation of 0.86 means they have usually moved in the same direction. SAWS charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RFG.
Performance
SAWS vs. RFG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SAWS achieves a 15.80% return, which is significantly higher than RFG's 13.90% return.
SAWS
- 1D
- -0.40%
- 1M
- -2.74%
- 6M
- 11.26%
- YTD
- 15.80%
- 1Y
- 27.20%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.76%
RFG
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- -4.54%
- 6M
- 8.66%
- YTD
- 13.90%
- 1Y
- 19.95%
- 3Y*
- 14.10%
- 5Y*
- 6.33%
- 10Y*
- 9.64%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.54%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $240.77K | $300.86K | $394.29K | |
| $34.79K | $48.41K | $36.83K |
SAWS vs. RFG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
SAWS AAM Sawgrass U.S. Small Cap Quality Growth ETF | 15.80% | 7.26% | 4.18% |
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 13.90% | 8.80% | -1.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between SAWS and RFG is 0.82, 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. | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2024 | 0.86 |
The correlation between SAWS and RFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
SAWS vs. RFG — Risk / Return Rank
SAWS
RFG
SAWS vs. RFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Sawgrass U.S. Small Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWS) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). 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.
| SAWS | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.57 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.17 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.47 | 1.81 | +0.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.37 | 6.13 | +1.24 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SAWS vs. RFG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SAWS drawdown since its inception was -22.04%, smaller than the maximum RFG drawdown of -51.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAWS and RFG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SAWS | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.04% | -51.93% | +29.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.23% | -10.41% | +0.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -26.71% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -35.16% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.92% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.15% | -7.56% | +1.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.40% | -8.93% | +3.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.42% | 3.07% | +0.35% |
Volatility
SAWS vs. RFG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for AAM Sawgrass U.S. Small Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWS) is 5.47%, while Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) has a volatility of 6.10%. This indicates that SAWS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SAWS | RFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.47% | 6.10% | -0.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.72% | 16.32% | -1.60% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.07% | 19.84% | -0.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.91% | 22.99% | -2.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.91% | 23.10% | -2.19% |
SAWS vs. RFG - Expense Ratio Comparison
SAWS has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than RFG's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
SAWS vs. RFG - Dividend Comparison
SAWS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than RFG's 0.15% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF | 0.15% | 0.43% | 0.38% | 0.99% | 0.78% | 0.05% | 0.27% | 0.64% | 0.76% | 0.66% | 0.35% | 0.61% |
SAWS AAM Sawgrass U.S. Small Cap Quality Growth ETF | 0.02% | 0.02% | 0.03% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SAWS and RFG have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RFG has higher volatility (6.10%) compared to SAWS (5.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SAWS dropped -22.04% vs RFG's -51.93%.
On 1-year performance, SAWS leads with 27.20% vs 19.95% for RFG. On fees, RFG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, SAWS has been the lower-risk option at 5.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, SAWS has performed better with a 27.20% return vs 19.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RFG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for SAWS.
RFG has the higher dividend yield at 0.15%, compared with 0.02% for SAWS.
SAWS is categorized as Quality Factor, while RFG is Small Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: AAM and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for SAWS and 0.35% for RFG.
SAWS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.33 vs 0.95), 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.
Find the right allocation for SAWS and RFG
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