Screener
BFOR vs RZG
Barron's 400 ETF vs Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Pure Growth ETF
Key differences
- RZG costs 0.30% less per year.
- Over the last 3 years, BFOR has delivered higher annualized returns.
- RZG has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BFOR | RZG | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.65% | 0.35% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $211M | $121M |
| Since | 2013 | 2006 |
| Dividend yield | 0.55% | 0.42% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +24.5% | +36.1% |
| CAGR 3Y | +20.2% | +19.2% |
| CAGR 5Y | +10.5% | +6.0% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.95 | 0.78 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.96% | 18.69% |
| Max drawdown | -41.27% | -54.02% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BFOR and RZG
Explore further