CATH vs. RSPT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CATH (Global X S&P 500 Catholic Values ETF) and RSPT (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CATH is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Catholic Values Index, while RSPT is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S&P 500® Information Technology Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CATH returned 14.82%/yr vs 22.48%/yr for RSPT. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CATH charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for RSPT.

Performance

CATH vs. RSPT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X S&P 500 Catholic Values ETF (CATH) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Technology ETF (RSPT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CATH achieves a 9.37% return, which is significantly lower than RSPT's 47.30% return. Over the past 10 years, CATH has underperformed RSPT with an annualized return of 14.82%, while RSPT has yielded a comparatively higher 22.48% annualized return.

CATH

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 4.21%
• YTD: 9.37%
• 6M: 9.22%
• 1Y: 24.47%
• 3Y*: 20.86%
• 5Y*: 12.53%
• 10Y*: 14.82%

RSPT

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 22.88%
• YTD: 47.30%
• 6M: 46.37%
• 1Y: 75.62%
• 3Y*: 33.71%
• 5Y*: 19.46%
• 10Y*: 22.48%

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

CATH vs. RSPT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CATH Global X S&P 500 Catholic Values ETF	9.37%	17.08%	23.34%	26.15%	-19.96%	28.87%	18.80%	30.64%	-5.80%	22.83%
RSPT Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Technology ETF	47.30%	22.15%	15.16%	35.18%	-24.50%	28.53%	30.21%	42.07%	-0.61%	32.98%

Correlation

The correlation between CATH and RSPT is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 20, 2016	0.86

The correlation between CATH and RSPT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

CATH vs. RSPT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CATH	RSPT
Technology	38.1%	97.6%
Financial Services	11.4%	0.1%
Communication Services	10.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	-
Healthcare	7.9%	-
Industrials	7.6%	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	-
Energy	3.3%	1.4%
Utilities	2.8%	-
Real Estate	1.9%	-
Basic Materials	1.7%	-

Return for Risk

CATH vs. RSPT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CATH

CATH Risk / Return Rank: 58
CATH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
CATH Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
CATH Omega Ratio Rank: 59
CATH Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
CATH Martin Ratio Rank: 64

RSPT

RSPT Risk / Return Rank: 91
RSPT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
RSPT Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
RSPT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
RSPT Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
RSPT Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

CATH vs. RSPT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Catholic Values ETF (CATH) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Technology ETF (RSPT). 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.

	CATH	RSPT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	3.54	-1.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.78	4.27	-1.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.55	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.61	7.12	-4.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.67	25.76	-14.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CATH vs. RSPT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CATH Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is lower than the RSPT Sharpe Ratio of 3.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CATH and RSPT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CATH	RSPT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.03	3.54	-1.51
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70	0.81	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.80	0.95	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.79	0.65	+0.14

Drawdowns

CATH vs. RSPT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CATH drawdown since its inception was -33.95%, smaller than the maximum RSPT drawdown of -58.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CATH and RSPT.

Drawdown Indicators

	CATH	RSPT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.95%	-58.91%	+24.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.42%	-10.67%	+1.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.34%	-26.62%	+7.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.14%	-32.49%	+4.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.95%	-33.67%	-0.28%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.70%	-0.76%	+0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.20%	-8.90%	+3.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.10%	2.95%	-0.85%

Volatility

CATH vs. RSPT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X S&P 500 Catholic Values ETF (CATH) is 2.69%, while Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Technology ETF (RSPT) has a volatility of 7.02%. This indicates that CATH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSPT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CATH	RSPT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.69%	7.02%	-4.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.11%	17.12%	-8.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.14%	21.55%	-9.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.89%	24.08%	-6.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.61%	23.77%	-5.16%

CATH vs. RSPT - Expense Ratio Comparison

CATH has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than RSPT's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

CATH vs. RSPT - Dividend Comparison

CATH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.77%, more than RSPT's 0.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CATH Global X S&P 500 Catholic Values ETF	0.77%	0.84%	0.95%	1.16%	1.34%	1.03%	1.23%	0.68%	2.01%	1.27%	0.50%	0.00%
RSPT Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Technology ETF	0.25%	0.39%	0.44%	0.56%	0.71%	0.50%	1.29%	0.92%	0.98%	0.84%	1.16%	1.18%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CATH and RSPT in my portfolio?

CATH and RSPT have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CATH or RSPT?

RSPT has higher volatility (7.02%) compared to CATH (2.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CATH dropped -33.95% vs RSPT's -58.91%.

Which ETF is better, CATH or RSPT?

On 10-year performance, RSPT leads with 22.48% vs 14.82% for CATH. On fees, CATH is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, CATH has been the lower-risk option at 2.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CATH or RSPT?

Over the 10-year period, RSPT has performed better with a 22.48% return vs 14.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CATH or RSPT?

CATH is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CATH or RSPT?

CATH has the higher dividend yield at 0.77%, compared with 0.25% for RSPT.

What is the main difference between CATH and RSPT?

CATH is categorized as S&P 500, while RSPT is Technology Equities. CATH tracks S&P 500 Catholic Values Index, while RSPT tracks S&P 500® Information Technology Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for CATH and 0.40% for RSPT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSPT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.54 vs 2.03), 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.