Screener
RZV vs OMFL
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Pure Value ETF vs Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Key differences
- OMFL costs 0.06% less per year.
- OMFL is significantly larger than RZV — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- RZV is classified as equity, while OMFL is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- RZV follows a index tracking strategy; OMFL uses systematic alpha.
- Over the last 3 years, RZV has delivered higher annualized returns.
- RZV has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| RZV | OMFL | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.35% | 0.29% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $265M | $4.6B |
| Since | 2006 | 2017 |
| Dividend yield | 1.36% | 0.78% |
| Asset class | equity | alternative |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | systematic alpha |
| CAGR 1Y | +46.3% | +25.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +18.4% | +14.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | +9.9% | +9.8% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.69 | 0.73 |
| Volatility 1Y | 20.87% | 12.16% |
| Max drawdown | -60.42% | -33.24% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to RZV and OMFL
Explore further