ESGB vs. RSPH

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

ESGB (IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF) and RSPH (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ESGB is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by IndexIQ, while RSPH is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Health Care -SEC. ESGB is actively managed, while RSPH is passively managed. Their -0.07 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. ESGB charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for RSPH.

Performance

ESGB vs. RSPH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF (ESGB) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF (RSPH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

ESGB

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

RSPH

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: 0.70%
• 6M: 8.20%
• YTD: 9.56%
• 1Y: 25.63%
• 3Y*: 6.05%
• 5Y*: 3.14%
• 10Y*: 8.73%
• ALL TIME*: 10.98%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RSPH Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF	$2.33M	$3.63M	$4.82M

ESGB vs. RSPH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
ESGB IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF	-0.18%
RSPH Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF	12.61%

Correlation

The correlation between ESGB and RSPH is -0.07, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2026	-0.07

Return for Risk

ESGB vs. RSPH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ESGB

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

RSPH

RSPH Risk / Return Rank: 66
RSPH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
RSPH Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
RSPH Omega Ratio Rank: 67
RSPH Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
RSPH Martin Ratio Rank: 51

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ESGB vs. RSPH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF (ESGB) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF (RSPH). 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.

	ESGB	RSPH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.60	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.41	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.28	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.34	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	5.96	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	ESGB	RSPH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-40.49%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-10.87%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.13%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.95%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.44%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-1.22%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-6.11%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	4.27%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ESGB	RSPH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.90%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.99%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	16.35%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	16.55%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	17.79%	—

ESGB vs. RSPH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESGB has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than RSPH's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

ESGB vs. RSPH - Dividend Comparison

ESGB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RSPH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ESGB IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RSPH Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF	0.67%	0.70%	0.71%	0.66%	0.64%	0.50%	0.51%	0.54%	0.53%	0.47%	0.48%	0.49%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESGB and RSPH in my portfolio?

ESGB and RSPH have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ESGB or RSPH?

On fees, ESGB is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ESGB or RSPH?

ESGB is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ESGB or RSPH?

RSPH has the higher dividend yield at 0.67%, compared with 0.00% for ESGB.

What is the main difference between ESGB and RSPH?

ESGB is categorized as Intermediate Core-Plus Bond, while RSPH is Health & Biotech Equities. They also come from different issuers: IndexIQ and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ESGB and 0.40% for RSPH.