EQWL vs. XLG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EQWL (Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EQWL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P 100 Equal Weight Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EQWL returned 14.47%/yr vs 17.28%/yr for XLG. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EQWL charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

EQWL vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EQWL achieves a 9.48% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 8.03% return. Over the past 10 years, EQWL has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of 14.47%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 17.28% annualized return.

EQWL

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 4.61%
• YTD: 9.48%
• 6M: 10.19%
• 1Y: 22.95%
• 3Y*: 20.06%
• 5Y*: 11.94%
• 10Y*: 14.47%

XLG

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 4.19%
• YTD: 8.03%
• 6M: 7.64%
• 1Y: 28.88%
• 3Y*: 24.70%
• 5Y*: 16.34%
• 10Y*: 17.28%

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

EQWL vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EQWL Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF	9.48%	17.61%	19.11%	19.48%	-11.46%	28.29%	13.94%	29.54%	-6.30%	24.41%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	8.03%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	30.77%	24.15%	32.04%	-3.59%	23.04%

Correlation

The correlation between EQWL and XLG is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.67
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2006	0.80

The correlation between EQWL and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.64 (1 year) to 0.80 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EQWL vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EQWL	XLG
Technology	22.8%	43.9%
Financial Services	15.6%	9.6%
Healthcare	14.0%	7.0%
Industrials	13.7%	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	8.9%	5.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.5%	11.3%
Communication Services	7.6%	17.1%
Energy	3.0%	2.7%
Utilities	3.0%	-
Real Estate	2.0%	-
Basic Materials	1.0%	0.6%

Return for Risk

EQWL vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

EQWL

EQWL Risk / Return Rank: 67
EQWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
EQWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
EQWL Omega Ratio Rank: 66
EQWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
EQWL Martin Ratio Rank: 69

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 60
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 65
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

EQWL vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.

	EQWL	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.22	2.18	+0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.12	2.95	+0.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.38	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.97	2.34	+0.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.52	8.77	+3.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EQWL vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQWL Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is comparable to the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQWL and XLG, 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

	EQWL	XLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.22	2.18	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80	0.88	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.86	0.92	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.60	0.63	-0.03

Drawdowns

EQWL vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQWL drawdown since its inception was -49.36%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQWL and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	EQWL	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.36%	-52.39%	+3.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.76%	-12.41%	+4.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.95%	-20.70%	+5.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.99%	-28.02%	+5.03%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.30%	-30.46%	-3.84%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.02%	+1.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.70%	-7.64%	+0.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.84%	3.30%	-1.46%

Volatility

EQWL vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL) is 2.61%, while Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) has a volatility of 3.19%. This indicates that EQWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EQWL	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.61%	3.19%	-0.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.69%	9.81%	-2.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.37%	13.32%	-2.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.98%	18.68%	-3.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.79%	18.84%	-2.05%

EQWL vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQWL has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

EQWL vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

EQWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%, more than XLG's 0.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EQWL Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF	1.53%	1.67%	1.86%	1.97%	2.12%	1.65%	2.01%	2.04%	2.23%	1.27%	2.01%	2.03%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.60%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EQWL and XLG in my portfolio?

EQWL and XLG have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EQWL or XLG?

XLG has higher volatility (3.19%) compared to EQWL (2.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EQWL dropped -49.36% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, EQWL or XLG?

On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 17.28% vs 14.47% for EQWL. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, EQWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EQWL or XLG?

Over the 10-year period, XLG has performed better with a 17.28% return vs 14.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EQWL or XLG?

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for EQWL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EQWL or XLG?

EQWL has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 0.60% for XLG.

What is the main difference between EQWL and XLG?

EQWL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. EQWL tracks S&P 100 Equal Weight Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EQWL and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 2.18), 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.