Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Pure Value ETF (RZV US) – Investment PropositionInvesco S&P SmallCap 600 Pure Value ETF (RZV) provides focused exposure to small-cap companies that score highly on classic value characteristics, emphasizing deeply discounted balance sheets and earnings profiles within the domestic small-cap universe. The strategy is rules-based and intentionally concentrated in the market’s most value-oriented names, accepting greater single-stock and industry skew in pursuit of a stronger value til ...

SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Value ETF (SLYV US) – Investment PropositionSPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Value ETF (SLYV) delivers focused access to U.S. small-cap companies screened for comparatively lower valuations and balance-sheet characteristics consistent with value style, using a transparent methodology to maintain diversified sector representation. The approach emphasizes fundamentals such as cash flow, earnings, and book value metrics, seeking to harvest the value premium while preserving breadth across the smal ...

Group 1 - The article discusses the search for a small-cap value ETF to gain exposure to the US stock market, highlighting the importance of size and value as investment factors [1] - The author emphasizes a quantitative approach to equity analysis, focusing on cash flow potential, relative value, and economic moat, while also integrating technical analysis to enhance investment success [1] - The author has a strong background in public accounting and economics, holding master's degrees from the University of Notre Dame and the University of Virginia, and has experience in researching sovereign debt defaults [1] Group 2 - The author is actively involved in writing educational content on investing and economic topics, including a YouTube channel dedicated to these subjects [1]

Core Insights - The article compares two small-cap value ETFs: SLYV, which tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Value Index, and IWN, which tracks the Russell 2000 Value Index, highlighting their differences in sector allocation, portfolio breadth, and performance [4][5]. Fund Overview - SLYV holds 454 companies with a sector tilt towards financial services (23%), consumer cyclicals (16%), and industrials (15%), with top holdings including Borgwarner, Hecla Mining, and Lincoln National [1]. - IWN has a broader portfolio of 1,407 stocks, primarily focused on financial services (27%), industrials (13%), and healthcare (11%), with top positions including Blk Csh Fnd Treasury Sl Agency, Echostar, and Hecla Mining [2]. Performance and Fees - SLYV is noted for its lower expense ratio and higher dividend yield compared to IWN, which charges 0.09 percentage points more annually [3][6]. - Over the past year, IWN has outperformed SLYV with a return of 13.4% versus 6.4%, although both funds perform comparably over the long term [6]. Sector Allocation - Both funds allocate the largest portion to financials, but SLYV has a more balanced distribution among consumer discretionary, industrials, and information technology, while IWN has healthcare as its third-largest sector [7]. - Investors seeking more healthcare exposure may prefer IWN, whereas those looking for more technology stocks may favor SLYV [7]. Individual Holdings - A notable difference in individual holdings is that IWN's largest holding is a money market fund, constituting 1% of the fund, contrasting with SLYV, which has stocks as its top ten holdings [8].