Screener
QTJL vs RFG
Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July vs Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Pure Growth ETF
Key differences
- RFG costs 0.44% less per year.
- RFG is significantly larger than QTJL — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- QTJL is classified as alternative, while RFG is equity — different risk/return profiles.
- QTJL follows a structured outcome strategy; RFG uses index tracking.
- RFG has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| QTJL | RFG | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.79% | 0.35% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $27M | $329M |
| Since | 2021 | 2006 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.34% |
| Asset class | alternative | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | structured outcome | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +24.8% | +34.2% |
| CAGR 3Y | +19.5% | +20.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +8.6% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.92 | 0.84 |
| Volatility 1Y | 10.26% | 18.65% |
| Max drawdown | -33.40% | -42.92% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to QTJL and RFG
Explore further