PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PBW vs. RSP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PBW vs. RSP - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBW achieves a 48.64% return, which is significantly higher than RSP's 9.70% return. Over the past 10 years, PBW has underperformed RSP with an annualized return of 11.06%, while RSP has yielded a comparatively higher 11.86% annualized return.


PBW

1D
-3.49%
1M
18.16%
YTD
48.64%
6M
46.91%
1Y
151.19%
3Y*
8.19%
5Y*
-10.05%
10Y*
11.06%

RSP

1D
-0.38%
1M
3.77%
YTD
9.70%
6M
10.18%
1Y
19.50%
3Y*
15.23%
5Y*
8.33%
10Y*
11.86%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBW vs. RSP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
PBW
Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF
48.64%53.96%-30.77%-20.03%-44.55%-29.86%204.82%62.58%-14.11%39.92%
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
9.70%11.21%12.79%13.70%-11.62%29.41%12.66%28.91%-7.84%18.52%

Correlation

The correlation between PBW and RSP is 0.54, 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

0.54

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.62

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2005

0.70

The correlation between PBW and RSP shifts across timeframes, from 0.54 (1 year) to 0.70 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PBW vs. RSP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PBW
RSP

Industrials

34.3%
14.1%

Basic Materials

16.4%
4.1%

Technology

14.3%
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

13.9%
9.9%

Energy

12.3%
4.5%

Utilities

6.3%
6.1%

Financial Services

1.4%
14.5%

Consumer Defensive

1.1%
6.5%

Communication Services

-

3.7%

Healthcare

-

11.0%

Real Estate

-

6.0%

Industrials

PBW
34.3%
RSP
14.1%

Basic Materials

PBW
16.4%
RSP
4.1%

Technology

PBW
14.3%
RSP
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

PBW
13.9%
RSP
9.9%

Energy

PBW
12.3%
RSP
4.5%

Utilities

PBW
6.3%
RSP
6.1%

Financial Services

PBW
1.4%
RSP
14.5%

Consumer Defensive

PBW
1.1%
RSP
6.5%

Communication Services

PBW

-

RSP
3.7%

Healthcare

PBW

-

RSP
11.0%

Real Estate

PBW

-

RSP
6.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

PBW vs. RSP — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBW
PBW Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

RSP
RSP Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
RSP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSP Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSP Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
RSP Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSP Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PBW vs. RSP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP). 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.


PBWRSPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.30

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.16

2.49

+4.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.88

9.48

+10.40

PBW vs. RSP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBW Sharpe Ratio is 3.77, which is higher than the RSP Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBW and RSP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PBWRSPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.77

1.70

+2.08

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.24

0.52

-0.75

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

0.65

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.03

0.57

-0.59

Drawdowns

PBW vs. RSP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBW drawdown since its inception was -89.02%, which is greater than RSP's maximum drawdown of -59.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBW and RSP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PBWRSPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.02%

-59.92%

-29.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.24%

-7.85%

-13.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-68.04%

-17.81%

-50.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-84.50%

-21.38%

-63.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-89.02%

-39.04%

-49.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-62.54%

-0.38%

-62.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-62.91%

-6.65%

-56.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.64%

2.06%

+5.58%

Volatility

PBW vs. RSP - Volatility Comparison

Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a higher volatility of 13.35% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) at 2.56%. This indicates that PBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PBWRSPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.35%

2.56%

+10.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.20%

8.29%

+19.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

40.48%

11.56%

+28.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

42.91%

16.18%

+26.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

38.76%

18.35%

+20.41%

PBW vs. RSP - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBW has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than RSP's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

PBW vs. RSP - Dividend Comparison

PBW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, less than RSP's 1.49% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
PBW
Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF
0.60%0.79%2.84%3.68%4.21%1.71%0.44%1.45%2.04%1.28%2.68%1.53%
RSP
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF
1.49%1.64%1.52%1.64%1.82%1.28%1.64%1.69%2.02%1.52%1.20%1.70%

Frequently Asked Questions


PBW and RSP have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PBW has higher volatility (13.35%) compared to RSP (2.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBW dropped -89.02% vs RSP's -59.92%.

On 10-year performance, RSP leads with 11.86% vs 11.06% for PBW. On fees, RSP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, RSP has been the lower-risk option at 2.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RSP has performed better with a 11.86% return vs 11.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RSP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

RSP has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 0.60% for PBW.

PBW is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while RSP is S&P 500. PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while RSP tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Index. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PBW and 0.20% for RSP.

PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.77 vs 1.70), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PBW and RSP

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer