HSBH vs. RSPF

Last updated Jun 27, 2026

HSBH (HSBC Holdings plc ADRhedged ETF) and RSPF (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF) are both Financials Equities funds - HSBH tracks the HSBC Holdings plc Local Shares Total Return while RSPF tracks the S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Financials -SEC. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, HSBH returned 66.23% vs 5.05% for RSPF. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HSBH charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for RSPF.

Performance

HSBH vs. RSPF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HSBC Holdings plc ADRhedged ETF (HSBH) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF (RSPF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HSBH achieves a 24.54% return, which is significantly higher than RSPF's -0.16% return.

HSBH

• 1D: -1.28%
• 1M: 0.71%
• YTD: 24.54%
• 6M: 22.90%
• 1Y: 66.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RSPF

• 1D: 1.22%
• 1M: 3.56%
• YTD: -0.16%
• 6M: -1.70%
• 1Y: 5.05%
• 3Y*: 17.74%
• 5Y*: 7.12%
• 10Y*: 12.64%

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

HSBH vs. RSPF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
HSBH HSBC Holdings plc ADRhedged ETF	24.54%	39.95%
RSPF Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF	-0.16%	17.19%

Correlation

The correlation between HSBH and RSPF is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2025	0.39

HSBH vs. RSPF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HSBH	RSPF
Financial Services	97.4%	92.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	1.3%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	6.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

HSBH vs. RSPF — Risk / Return Rank

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

HSBH

HSBH Risk / Return Rank: 90
HSBH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
HSBH Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
HSBH Omega Ratio Rank: 90
HSBH Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
HSBH Martin Ratio Rank: 88

RSPF

RSPF Risk / Return Rank: 13
RSPF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
RSPF Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
RSPF Omega Ratio Rank: 12
RSPF Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
RSPF Martin Ratio Rank: 13

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.

HSBH vs. RSPF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC Holdings plc ADRhedged ETF (HSBH) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF (RSPF). 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.

	HSBH	RSPF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.82	0.34	+2.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.59	0.56	+3.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.07	+0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.49	0.36	+4.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.28	0.98	+15.30

HSBH vs. RSPF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HSBH Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is higher than the RSPF Sharpe Ratio of 0.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HSBH and RSPF, 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

HSBH vs. RSPF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HSBH drawdown since its inception was -14.81%, smaller than the maximum RSPF drawdown of -81.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HSBH and RSPF.

Drawdown Indicators

	HSBH	RSPF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.81%	-81.32%	+66.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.81%	-14.13%	-0.68%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.26%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.68%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.80%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.35%	-3.05%	+0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.33%	-18.99%	+16.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.08%	5.16%	-1.08%

Volatility

HSBH vs. RSPF - Volatility Comparison

HSBC Holdings plc ADRhedged ETF (HSBH) has a higher volatility of 8.34% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF (RSPF) at 4.22%. This indicates that HSBH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSPF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HSBH	RSPF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.34%	4.22%	+4.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.38%	11.45%	+7.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.68%	15.10%	+8.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.87%	19.75%	+3.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.87%	22.84%	+0.03%

HSBH vs. RSPF - Expense Ratio Comparison

HSBH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than RSPF's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

HSBH vs. RSPF - Dividend Comparison

HSBH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.38%, more than RSPF's 1.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HSBH HSBC Holdings plc ADRhedged ETF	2.38%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RSPF Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF	1.62%	1.55%	1.65%	2.16%	1.95%	1.56%	2.24%	1.85%	2.51%	1.28%	37.55%	2.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HSBH and RSPF in my portfolio?

HSBH and RSPF have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HSBH or RSPF?

HSBH has higher volatility (8.34%) compared to RSPF (4.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HSBH dropped -14.81% vs RSPF's -81.32%.

Which ETF is better, HSBH or RSPF?

On 1-year performance, HSBH leads with 66.23% vs 5.05% for RSPF. On fees, HSBH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, RSPF has been the lower-risk option at 4.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HSBH or RSPF?

Over the 1-year period, HSBH has performed better with a 66.23% return vs 5.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HSBH or RSPF?

HSBH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HSBH or RSPF?

HSBH has the higher dividend yield at 2.38%, compared with 1.62% for RSPF.

What is the main difference between HSBH and RSPF?

HSBH tracks HSBC Holdings plc Local Shares Total Return, while RSPF tracks S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Financials -SEC. They also come from different issuers: ADRhedged and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for HSBH and 0.40% for RSPF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HSBH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 0.34), 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.