CRUX vs. RSPG

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

CRUX (Columbia Core Bond ETF) and RSPG (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CRUX is a Intermediate Core Bond fund actively managed by Columbia Threadneedle, while RSPG is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index. CRUX is actively managed, while RSPG is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.52, they often move in opposite directions. CRUX charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for RSPG.

Performance

CRUX vs. RSPG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Core Bond ETF (CRUX) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CRUX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.27%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RSPG

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: -2.84%
• 6M: 23.53%
• YTD: 27.76%
• 1Y: 32.19%
• 3Y*: 15.08%
• 5Y*: 21.24%
• 10Y*: 8.58%

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

CRUX vs. RSPG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
CRUX Columbia Core Bond ETF	0.02%
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	-1.11%

Correlation

The correlation between CRUX and RSPG is -0.52, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2026	-0.52

Return for Risk

CRUX vs. RSPG — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRUX

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

RSPG

RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 52
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 48
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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.

CRUX vs. RSPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Core Bond ETF (CRUX) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG). 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.

	CRUX	RSPG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.51	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.02	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.25	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.40	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	6.19	—

Drawdowns

CRUX vs. RSPG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRUX drawdown since its inception was -1.85%, smaller than the maximum RSPG drawdown of -79.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRUX and RSPG.

Drawdown Indicators

	CRUX	RSPG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.85%	-79.98%	+78.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-13.72%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.06%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.44%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.17%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-10.24%	+9.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.58%	-25.39%	+24.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	5.31%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CRUX	RSPG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.81%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	16.95%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.04%	21.90%	-17.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.04%	28.12%	-24.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.04%	33.47%	-29.43%

CRUX vs. RSPG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CRUX has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is lower than RSPG's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

CRUX vs. RSPG - Dividend Comparison

CRUX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, less than RSPG's 2.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CRUX Columbia Core Bond ETF	1.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	2.08%	2.60%	2.43%	2.84%	3.43%	2.37%	3.15%	2.15%	2.18%	2.55%	1.14%	2.80%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CRUX and RSPG in my portfolio?

CRUX and RSPG have a correlation of -0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CRUX or RSPG?

On fees, CRUX is cheaper at 0.32% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CRUX or RSPG?

CRUX is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CRUX or RSPG?

RSPG has the higher dividend yield at 2.08%, compared with 1.40% for CRUX.

What is the main difference between CRUX and RSPG?

CRUX is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while RSPG is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Columbia Threadneedle and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for CRUX and 0.40% for RSPG.