MLPX vs. RSPG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MLPX (Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) and RSPG (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPX is a MLPs fund tracking the Solactive MLP & Energy Infrastructure Index, while RSPG is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MLPX returned 12.41%/yr vs 9.73%/yr for RSPG. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MLPX charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for RSPG.

Performance

MLPX vs. RSPG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MLPX achieves a 23.59% return, which is significantly lower than RSPG's 34.27% return. Over the past 10 years, MLPX has outperformed RSPG with an annualized return of 12.41%, while RSPG has yielded a comparatively lower 9.73% annualized return.

MLPX

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: -2.15%
• YTD: 23.59%
• 6M: 23.51%
• 1Y: 22.94%
• 3Y*: 28.13%
• 5Y*: 20.92%
• 10Y*: 12.41%

RSPG

• 1D: 1.25%
• 1M: -2.65%
• YTD: 34.27%
• 6M: 28.95%
• 1Y: 47.49%
• 3Y*: 19.93%
• 5Y*: 21.10%
• 10Y*: 9.73%

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

MLPX vs. RSPG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	23.59%	4.96%	42.90%	15.77%	21.54%	39.63%	-20.32%	19.04%	-15.64%	-4.53%
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	34.27%	7.01%	6.09%	4.49%	57.97%	57.73%	-32.44%	13.38%	-24.68%	-6.39%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPX and RSPG is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 8, 2013	0.81

The correlation between MLPX and RSPG shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (1 year) to 0.81 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MLPX vs. RSPG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MLPX	RSPG
Energy	99.5%	100.0%
Utilities	0.3%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

MLPX vs. RSPG — Risk / Return Rank

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

MLPX

MLPX Risk / Return Rank: 44
MLPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
MLPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
MLPX Omega Ratio Rank: 39
MLPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
MLPX Martin Ratio Rank: 44

RSPG

RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 64
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 56
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

MLPX vs. RSPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) 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.

	MLPX	RSPG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.50	2.20	-0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	2.80	-0.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.35	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.82	3.92	-1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.27	11.59	-4.32
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MLPX vs. RSPG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPX Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is lower than the RSPG Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPX and RSPG, 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

	MLPX	RSPG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.50	2.20	-0.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.05	0.75	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.47	0.29	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.35	0.18	+0.17

Drawdowns

MLPX vs. RSPG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPX drawdown since its inception was -70.67%, smaller than the maximum RSPG drawdown of -79.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPX and RSPG.

Drawdown Indicators

	MLPX	RSPG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.67%	-79.98%	+9.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.18%	-12.18%	+4.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.77%	-23.06%	+6.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.72%	-28.44%	+8.72%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-64.70%	-73.17%	+8.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.68%	-5.67%	-0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.63%	-25.47%	+8.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.17%	4.11%	-0.94%

Volatility

MLPX vs. RSPG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) is 6.41%, while Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) has a volatility of 8.19%. This indicates that MLPX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSPG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MLPX	RSPG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.41%	8.19%	-1.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.84%	16.77%	-4.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.38%	21.69%	-6.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.08%	28.31%	-8.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.50%	33.57%	-7.07%

MLPX vs. RSPG - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPX has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than RSPG's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPX vs. RSPG - Dividend Comparison

MLPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.15%, more than RSPG's 1.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	4.15%	4.88%	4.30%	5.22%	5.23%	5.98%	8.32%	5.78%	5.77%	4.36%	5.50%	4.81%
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	1.94%	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 MLPX and RSPG in my portfolio?

MLPX and RSPG have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MLPX or RSPG?

RSPG has higher volatility (8.19%) compared to MLPX (6.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPX dropped -70.67% vs RSPG's -79.98%.

Which ETF is better, MLPX or RSPG?

On 10-year performance, MLPX leads with 12.41% vs 9.73% for RSPG. On fees, RSPG is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, MLPX has been the lower-risk option at 6.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MLPX or RSPG?

Over the 10-year period, MLPX has performed better with a 12.41% return vs 9.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MLPX or RSPG?

RSPG is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for MLPX.

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

MLPX has the higher dividend yield at 4.15%, compared with 1.94% for RSPG.

What is the main difference between MLPX and RSPG?

MLPX is categorized as MLPs, while RSPG is Energy Equities. MLPX tracks Solactive MLP & Energy Infrastructure Index, while RSPG tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for MLPX and 0.40% for RSPG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSPG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.50), 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.