Screener
CZA vs RWK
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF
Key differences
- RWK costs 0.30% less per year.
- RWK is significantly larger than CZA — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, RWK has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| CZA | RWK | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.69% | 0.39% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $184M | $1.2B |
| Since | 2007 | 2008 |
| Dividend yield | 1.47% | 1.14% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +14.2% | +28.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +13.9% | +19.0% |
| CAGR 5Y | +7.0% | +10.6% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.72 | 0.83 |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.79% | 16.65% |
| Max drawdown | -46.18% | -46.20% |
Similar to CZA and RWK
Explore further