PSC
Principal U.S. Small-Cap ETF
SMB
Adj. R2
0.952
Rel. Sharpe
0.970
Mkt beta
1.01
AUM
US$1.9B
MER
0.38%
Valuation
237
ETF comparison
Verified factor-similar pair
PSC vs RFG
These two ETFs meet the same FF6 US comparison criteria: US-listed equity ETFs, the same USD model basis, at least one material non-market factor, and 100% overlap in statistically significant material factor exposure.
SMB
Similarity score
80
Verified similar
The score combines exposure-level distance, factor-vector shape, market-beta closeness, and a small backtested relative-Sharpe term.
Quick Read
- PSC has the higher backtested relative Sharpe (0.970 vs 0.812).
- RFG has the lower published fee (0.35% vs 0.38%).
- PSC is cheaper on dividend valuation (237 vs 372, where 100 is each fund's historical median).
- PSC has the stronger regression fit (adjusted R-squared 0.952 vs 0.864).
These are screening signals, not a complete review of portfolio construction, turnover, taxes, or trading quality.
RFG
Invesco S&P Midcap 400 Pure Growth ETF
SMB
Adj. R2
0.864
Rel. Sharpe
0.812
Mkt beta
1.05
AUM
US$310M
MER
0.35%
Valuation
372
Factor Exposure Match
Blue bars compare raw factor beta magnitude. Green bars compare absolute t-stat strength. Dim bars indicate the t-stat is below 1.96.
SMB
diff +0.21
HML
diff +0.32
RMW
diff -0.11
CMA
diff +0.08
UMD
diff -0.01
Why This Pair Matches
Exposure level
77
Exposure shape
94
Mkt beta diff
0.04
Rel. Sharpe diff
0.158
This comparison focuses on measured factor exposure. It does not compare holdings methodology, turnover, tax handling, or issuer process. Backtested relative Sharpe is a secondary signal rather than a stand-alone forecast. See methodology.
Monthly updates
Get the next US ETF leaders update
Get one monthly email when the US leaders table refreshes, plus methodology and comparison-page updates.
Monthly leaders refresh
Download-access updates
Low-volume research notes
One monthly email when the data drop lands. This browser will remember you after signup.