Skip to content
Beacon
Screener

EPRF vs RWL

Innovator S&P Investment Grade Preferred ETF vs Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF

EPRF

Innovator S&P Investment Grade Preferred ETF

Innovator ETFs

Annual cost

0.47%

Fund size

$72M

RWL

Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF

Invesco

Annual cost

0.39%

Fund size

$8.8B

Key differences

  • RWL costs 0.08% less per year.
  • RWL is significantly larger than EPRF — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
  • EPRF is classified as alternative, while RWL is equity — different risk/return profiles.
  • EPRF follows a structured outcome strategy; RWL uses index tracking.
  • Over the last 3 years, RWL has delivered higher annualized returns.
  • RWL has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.

Side-by-side comparison

EPRFRWL
Annual cost (TER)0.47%0.39%
Fund size (AUM)$72M$8.8B
Since20162008
Dividend yield6.08%1.28%
Asset classalternativeequity
Regionnorth americanorth america
Strategystructured outcomeindex tracking
CAGR 1Y+4.0%+29.1%
CAGR 3Y+4.0%+20.2%
CAGR 5Y-1.5%+13.3%
Sharpe 3Y0.091.28
Volatility 1Y7.59%10.12%
Max drawdown-26.82%-36.04%

Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.

Similar to EPRF and RWL