PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SQLV vs. RZV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SQLV vs. RZV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SQLV achieves a 12.76% return, which is significantly lower than RZV's 17.78% return.


SQLV

1D
-1.66%
1M
1.74%
YTD
12.76%
6M
12.70%
1Y
25.91%
3Y*
12.10%
5Y*
6.01%
10Y*

RZV

1D
-1.04%
1M
3.13%
YTD
17.78%
6M
15.59%
1Y
42.30%
3Y*
17.71%
5Y*
8.85%
10Y*
10.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SQLV vs. RZV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SQLV
Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF
12.76%2.50%4.76%21.21%-12.86%37.14%7.13%17.41%-10.55%8.51%
RZV
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF
17.78%8.65%5.06%22.97%-6.80%45.95%-3.88%22.29%-19.66%11.93%

Correlation

The correlation between SQLV and RZV 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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2017

0.75

The correlation between SQLV and RZV shifts across timeframes, from 0.75 (all time) to 0.92 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SQLV vs. RZV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SQLV
RZV

Financial Services

18.7%
7.3%

Healthcare

18.0%
8.8%

Technology

15.4%
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

14.2%
26.1%

Industrials

10.3%
15.7%

Consumer Defensive

8.7%
7.7%

Communication Services

5.3%
4.2%

Energy

4.4%
9.7%

Basic Materials

4.2%
6.4%

Real Estate

0.6%
5.0%

Utilities

0.3%
0.4%

Financial Services

SQLV
18.7%
RZV
7.3%

Healthcare

SQLV
18.0%
RZV
8.8%

Technology

SQLV
15.4%
RZV
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

SQLV
14.2%
RZV
26.1%

Industrials

SQLV
10.3%
RZV
15.7%

Consumer Defensive

SQLV
8.7%
RZV
7.7%

Communication Services

SQLV
5.3%
RZV
4.2%

Energy

SQLV
4.4%
RZV
9.7%

Basic Materials

SQLV
4.2%
RZV
6.4%

Real Estate

SQLV
0.6%
RZV
5.0%

Utilities

SQLV
0.3%
RZV
0.4%

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

SQLV vs. RZV — Risk / Return Rank

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

SQLV
SQLV Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
SQLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SQLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
SQLV Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
SQLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
SQLV Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

RZV
RZV Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
RZV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RZV Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
RZV Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
RZV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
RZV Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SQLV vs. RZV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV). 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.


SQLVRZVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.35

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.94

3.38

-0.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.77

11.02

-2.25

SQLV vs. RZV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SQLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is comparable to the RZV Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SQLV and RZV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


SQLVRZVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.48

2.06

-0.58

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

0.36

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.27

+0.11

Drawdowns

SQLV vs. RZV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SQLV drawdown since its inception was -48.34%, smaller than the maximum RZV drawdown of -77.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SQLV and RZV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SQLVRZVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.34%

-77.11%

+28.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.84%

-12.56%

+3.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.86%

-29.81%

+2.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.86%

-29.81%

+2.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-60.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.66%

-1.04%

-0.62%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.95%

-13.60%

+4.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.96%

3.85%

-0.89%

Volatility

SQLV vs. RZV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) is 4.30%, while Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) has a volatility of 5.21%. This indicates that SQLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RZV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SQLVRZVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.30%

5.21%

-0.91%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.36%

13.66%

-2.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.70%

20.69%

-2.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.99%

24.37%

-3.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.36%

27.04%

-3.68%

SQLV vs. RZV - Expense Ratio Comparison

SQLV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RZV's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

SQLV vs. RZV - Dividend Comparison

SQLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than RZV's 1.35% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RZV
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF
1.35%1.59%1.14%1.13%1.43%0.86%0.63%1.03%2.03%1.02%0.46%1.24%
SQLV
Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF
1.01%1.15%1.11%1.09%1.24%1.12%1.22%1.20%1.08%0.40%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.90, SQLV and RZV 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.

RZV has higher volatility (5.21%) compared to SQLV (4.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SQLV dropped -48.34% vs RZV's -77.11%.

On 5-year performance, RZV leads with 8.85% vs 6.01% for SQLV. On fees, RZV is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, SQLV has been the lower-risk option at 4.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, RZV has performed better with a 8.85% return vs 6.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

RZV has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 1.01% for SQLV.

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for SQLV and 0.35% for RZV.

RZV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.48), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SQLV and RZV

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