SMMD vs. RZG

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

SMMD (iShares Russell 2500 ETF) and RZG (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - SMMD tracks the Russell 2500 Index while RZG tracks the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SMMD returned 8.99%/yr vs 7.44%/yr for RZG. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SMMD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RZG.

Performance

SMMD vs. RZG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2500 ETF (SMMD) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SMMD achieves a 20.90% return, which is significantly lower than RZG's 29.19% return.

SMMD

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: 0.58%
• 6M: 12.63%
• YTD: 20.90%
• 1Y: 32.16%
• 3Y*: 16.58%
• 5Y*: 8.99%
• 10Y*: —

RZG

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 3.18%
• 6M: 21.89%
• YTD: 29.19%
• 1Y: 37.02%
• 3Y*: 18.39%
• 5Y*: 7.44%
• 10Y*: 10.14%

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

SMMD vs. RZG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SMMD iShares Russell 2500 ETF	20.90%	11.72%	11.87%	17.71%	-18.53%	18.30%	19.98%	28.01%	-10.58%	11.27%
RZG Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF	29.19%	10.22%	9.84%	19.15%	-29.00%	21.01%	17.76%	14.25%	-8.70%	12.80%

Correlation

The correlation between SMMD and RZG is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 7, 2017	0.89

The correlation between SMMD and RZG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

SMMD vs. RZG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SMMD	RZG
Industrials	22.7%	17.1%
Technology	15.8%	16.6%
Financial Services	13.7%	14.2%
Healthcare	13.2%	22.7%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	9.1%
Real Estate	7.9%	4.4%
Basic Materials	4.5%	0.4%
Energy	3.7%	2.7%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	5.4%
Utilities	2.8%	0.4%
Communication Services	2.5%	3.5%

Return for Risk

SMMD vs. RZG — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMMD

SMMD Risk / Return Rank: 74
SMMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
SMMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
SMMD Omega Ratio Rank: 66
SMMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
SMMD Martin Ratio Rank: 82

RZG

RZG Risk / Return Rank: 81
RZG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
RZG Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
RZG Omega Ratio Rank: 70
RZG Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
RZG Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

SMMD vs. RZG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2500 ETF (SMMD) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG). 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.

	SMMD	RZG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	1.96	-0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.62	2.90	-0.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.33	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.34	4.31	-0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.59	14.30	-1.71

SMMD vs. RZG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMMD Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the RZG Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMMD and RZG, 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

SMMD vs. RZG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMMD drawdown since its inception was -41.06%, smaller than the maximum RZG drawdown of -58.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMMD and RZG.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMMD	RZG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.06%	-58.52%	+17.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.66%	-8.63%	-1.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.50%	-25.73%	+0.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.26%	-38.33%	+10.07%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-54.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.60%	-3.68%	+2.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.28%	-12.06%	+3.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.56%	2.60%	-0.04%

Volatility

SMMD vs. RZG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 2500 ETF (SMMD) is 3.87%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) has a volatility of 4.94%. This indicates that SMMD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RZG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SMMD	RZG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.87%	4.94%	-1.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.28%	14.35%	-1.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.63%	18.99%	-1.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.88%	23.04%	-2.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.31%	24.62%	-2.31%

SMMD vs. RZG - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMMD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than RZG's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

SMMD vs. RZG - Dividend Comparison

SMMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, more than RZG's 0.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RZG Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF	0.44%	0.37%	0.95%	1.43%	1.59%	0.22%	0.49%	0.70%	0.46%	0.44%	0.65%	0.70%
SMMD iShares Russell 2500 ETF	1.06%	1.28%	1.27%	1.44%	1.79%	1.12%	1.31%	1.50%	2.45%	0.68%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SMMD and RZG in my portfolio?

SMMD and RZG have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SMMD or RZG?

RZG has higher volatility (4.94%) compared to SMMD (3.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMMD dropped -41.06% vs RZG's -58.52%.

Which ETF is better, SMMD or RZG?

On 5-year performance, SMMD leads with 8.99% vs 7.44% for RZG. On fees, SMMD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, SMMD has been the lower-risk option at 3.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMMD or RZG?

Over the 5-year period, SMMD has performed better with a 8.99% return vs 7.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMMD or RZG?

SMMD is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RZG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SMMD or RZG?

SMMD has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 0.44% for RZG.

What is the main difference between SMMD and RZG?

SMMD tracks Russell 2500 Index, while RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SMMD and 0.35% for RZG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RZG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.96 vs 1.83), 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.