BEDZ vs. RSPD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BEDZ (AdvisorShares Hotel ETF) and RSPD (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Discretionary ETF) are both Consumer Discretionary Equities funds. BEDZ is actively managed, while RSPD is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BEDZ returned 8.91%/yr vs 3.43%/yr for RSPD. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BEDZ charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for RSPD.

Performance

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Discretionary ETF (RSPD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BEDZ achieves a 10.82% return, which is significantly higher than RSPD's -3.06% return.

BEDZ

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 9.56%
• YTD: 10.82%
• 6M: 8.96%
• 1Y: 24.44%
• 3Y*: 16.30%
• 5Y*: 8.91%
• 10Y*: —

RSPD

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 2.26%
• YTD: -3.06%
• 6M: -4.33%
• 1Y: 6.74%
• 3Y*: 8.83%
• 5Y*: 3.43%
• 10Y*: 8.53%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BEDZ AdvisorShares Hotel ETF	10.82%	3.46%	18.31%	23.88%	-13.40%	7.95%
RSPD Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Discretionary ETF	-3.06%	7.98%	13.37%	22.55%	-24.03%	9.20%

Correlation

The correlation between BEDZ and RSPD is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2021	0.82

The correlation between BEDZ and RSPD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BEDZ	RSPD
Consumer Cyclical	52.0%	96.1%
Real Estate	38.2%	-
Industrials	3.9%	1.8%
Communication Services	1.5%	2.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.1%
Healthcare	-	-
Technology	-	2.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BEDZ vs. RSPD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BEDZ

BEDZ Risk / Return Rank: 37
BEDZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
BEDZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
BEDZ Omega Ratio Rank: 33
BEDZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BEDZ Martin Ratio Rank: 34

RSPD

RSPD Risk / Return Rank: 14
RSPD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
RSPD Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
RSPD Omega Ratio Rank: 13
RSPD Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
RSPD Martin Ratio Rank: 14

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Discretionary ETF (RSPD). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BEDZ	RSPD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.20	0.37	+0.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	0.69	+1.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.07	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.04	0.49	+1.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.78	1.17	+3.60

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BEDZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is higher than the RSPD Sharpe Ratio of 0.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BEDZ and RSPD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BEDZ drawdown since its inception was -29.70%, smaller than the maximum RSPD drawdown of -68.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BEDZ and RSPD.

Drawdown Indicators

	BEDZ	RSPD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.70%	-68.00%	+38.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.06%	-13.80%	+1.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.31%	-21.01%	-7.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.70%	-34.41%	+4.71%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-48.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.92%	-7.89%	+6.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.00%	-10.69%	+2.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.13%	5.77%	-0.64%

Volatility

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ) is 4.98%, while Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Discretionary ETF (RSPD) has a volatility of 5.66%. This indicates that BEDZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSPD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BEDZ	RSPD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.98%	5.66%	-0.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.25%	14.03%	+1.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.39%	18.54%	+1.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.89%	22.17%	+2.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.78%	23.12%	+1.66%

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Expense Ratio Comparison

BEDZ has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than RSPD's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

BEDZ vs. RSPD - Dividend Comparison

BEDZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%, more than RSPD's 0.89% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BEDZ AdvisorShares Hotel ETF	2.08%	2.31%	0.00%	1.67%	0.21%	0.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RSPD Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Consumer Discretionary ETF	0.89%	1.08%	0.84%	1.09%	0.99%	0.53%	0.81%	1.59%	1.67%	1.45%	1.27%	1.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BEDZ and RSPD in my portfolio?

BEDZ and RSPD have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BEDZ or RSPD?

RSPD has higher volatility (5.66%) compared to BEDZ (4.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BEDZ dropped -29.70% vs RSPD's -68.00%.

Which ETF is better, BEDZ or RSPD?

On 5-year performance, BEDZ leads with 8.91% vs 3.43% for RSPD. On fees, RSPD is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, BEDZ has been the lower-risk option at 4.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BEDZ or RSPD?

Over the 5-year period, BEDZ has performed better with a 8.91% return vs 3.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BEDZ or RSPD?

RSPD is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for BEDZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BEDZ or RSPD?

BEDZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.08%, compared with 0.89% for RSPD.

What is the main difference between BEDZ and RSPD?

They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for BEDZ and 0.40% for RSPD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BEDZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.20 vs 0.37), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.