Screener
RWL vs SPXN
Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF vs ProShares S&P 500 ex-Financials ETF
Key differences
- SPXN costs 0.30% less per year.
- RWL is significantly larger than SPXN — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, SPXN has delivered higher annualized returns.
- RWL has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| RWL | SPXN | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.39% | 0.09% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $8.8B | $74M |
| Since | 2008 | 2015 |
| Dividend yield | 1.28% | 0.93% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +27.9% | +33.8% |
| CAGR 3Y | +20.3% | +24.0% |
| CAGR 5Y | +12.9% | +14.9% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.28 | 1.24 |
| Volatility 1Y | 10.14% | 12.83% |
| Max drawdown | -36.04% | -32.10% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to RWL and SPXN
Explore further