SMIG vs. RWJ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

SMIG (Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF) and RWJ (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. SMIG is actively managed, while RWJ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SMIG returned 13.57%/yr vs 18.15%/yr for RWJ. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SMIG charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RWJ.

Performance

SMIG vs. RWJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG) 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, SMIG achieves a 12.95% return, which is significantly lower than RWJ's 19.01% return.

SMIG

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.34%
• YTD: 12.95%
• 6M: 11.75%
• 1Y: 14.54%
• 3Y*: 13.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RWJ

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 4.67%
• YTD: 19.01%
• 6M: 17.54%
• 1Y: 37.61%
• 3Y*: 18.15%
• 5Y*: 8.58%
• 10Y*: 13.63%

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

SMIG vs. RWJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
SMIG Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF	12.95%	0.78%	17.63%	13.62%	-11.83%	5.23%
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	19.01%	7.75%	11.81%	16.21%	-10.97%	5.13%

Correlation

The correlation between SMIG and RWJ is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021	0.86

The correlation between SMIG and RWJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

SMIG vs. RWJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SMIG	RWJ
Financial Services	21.1%	10.7%
Industrials	18.2%	16.0%
Consumer Cyclical	13.5%	23.9%
Technology	10.7%	11.2%
Energy	10.4%	7.2%
Utilities	9.8%	0.8%
Real Estate	9.8%	3.9%
Healthcare	2.7%	11.0%
Communication Services	2.2%	3.5%
Basic Materials	2.0%	5.0%
Consumer Defensive	1.9%	6.8%

Return for Risk

SMIG vs. RWJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMIG

SMIG Risk / Return Rank: 36
SMIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
SMIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
SMIG Omega Ratio Rank: 34
SMIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
SMIG Martin Ratio Rank: 32

RWJ

RWJ Risk / Return Rank: 63
RWJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
RWJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
RWJ Omega Ratio Rank: 57
RWJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
RWJ Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

SMIG vs. RWJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG) 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.

	SMIG	RWJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.22	1.95	-0.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	2.83	-0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.34	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.71	3.34	-1.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.45	10.72	-6.27

SMIG vs. RWJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMIG Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is lower than the RWJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMIG 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.

Drawdowns

SMIG vs. RWJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMIG drawdown since its inception was -19.65%, smaller than the maximum RWJ drawdown of -55.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMIG and RWJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMIG	RWJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.65%	-55.97%	+36.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.52%	-11.31%	+2.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.23%	-29.29%	+10.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.29%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-51.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	-1.68%	+1.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.48%	-9.21%	+2.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.27%	3.52%	-0.25%

Volatility

SMIG vs. RWJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF (SMIG) is 3.60%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) has a volatility of 4.65%. This indicates that SMIG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RWJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SMIG	RWJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.60%	4.65%	-1.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.48%	12.61%	-4.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.05%	19.39%	-7.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.16%	23.66%	-7.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.16%	26.12%	-9.96%

SMIG vs. RWJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMIG has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RWJ's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

SMIG vs. RWJ - Dividend Comparison

SMIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, more than RWJ's 1.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	1.05%	1.11%	1.15%	1.34%	1.02%	0.61%	0.89%	1.22%	1.44%	1.11%	0.60%	0.74%
SMIG Bahl & Gaynor Small/Mid Cap Income Growth ETF	1.71%	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 SMIG and RWJ in my portfolio?

SMIG and RWJ have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SMIG or RWJ?

RWJ has higher volatility (4.65%) compared to SMIG (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMIG dropped -19.65% vs RWJ's -55.97%.

Which ETF is better, SMIG or RWJ?

On 3-year performance, RWJ leads with 18.15% vs 13.57% for SMIG. On fees, RWJ is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, SMIG has been the lower-risk option at 3.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMIG or RWJ?

Over the 3-year period, RWJ has performed better with a 18.15% return vs 13.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMIG or RWJ?

RWJ is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SMIG.

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

SMIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.71%, compared with 1.05% for RWJ.

What is the main difference between SMIG and RWJ?

They also come from different issuers: Bahl & Gaynor and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for SMIG and 0.39% for RWJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 1.22), 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.