RSPA vs. EFAA

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

RSPA (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Income Advantage ETF) and EFAA (Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSPA is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Equal Weight Index, while EFAA is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Invesco. RSPA is passively managed, while EFAA is actively managed. Over the past year, RSPA returned 19.71% vs 21.12% for EFAA. Their 0.61 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RSPA charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for EFAA.

Performance

RSPA vs. EFAA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Income Advantage ETF (RSPA) and Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPA achieves a 11.50% return, which is significantly higher than EFAA's 9.16% return.

RSPA

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.86%
• 6M: 8.76%
• YTD: 11.50%
• 1Y: 19.71%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.97%

EFAA

• 1D: -0.65%
• 1M: 1.08%
• 6M: 5.62%
• YTD: 9.16%
• 1Y: 21.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.76%

*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)
EFAA Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF	$3.76M	$5.97M	$4.87M
RSPA Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Income Advantage ETF	$10.20M	$12.25M	$9.83M

RSPA vs. EFAA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RSPA Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Income Advantage ETF	11.50%	11.07%	3.51%
EFAA Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF	9.16%	25.80%	-3.61%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPA and EFAA is 0.62, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 17, 2024	0.61

The correlation between RSPA and EFAA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

RSPA vs. EFAA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSPA	EFAA
Technology	17.3%	12.9%
Industrials	15.7%	19.0%
Financial Services	13.9%	24.7%
Healthcare	12.0%	10.4%
Consumer Cyclical	10.9%	7.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.3%	6.7%
Utilities	6.3%	3.7%
Real Estate	5.9%	1.7%
Communication Services	4.0%	4.4%
Basic Materials	3.9%	5.8%
Energy	3.8%	3.3%

Return for Risk

RSPA vs. EFAA — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPA

RSPA Risk / Return Rank: 84
RSPA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
RSPA Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
RSPA Omega Ratio Rank: 82
RSPA Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
RSPA Martin Ratio Rank: 86

EFAA

EFAA Risk / Return Rank: 70
EFAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
EFAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
EFAA Omega Ratio Rank: 75
EFAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
EFAA Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

RSPA vs. EFAA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Income Advantage ETF (RSPA) and Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA). 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.

	RSPA	EFAA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	1.70	+0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	2.41	+0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.31	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.98	2.08	+0.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.14	8.13	+4.01

RSPA vs. EFAA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPA Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the EFAA Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPA and EFAA, 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

RSPA vs. EFAA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPA drawdown since its inception was -15.37%, which is greater than EFAA's maximum drawdown of -11.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPA and EFAA.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSPA	EFAA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.37%	-11.97%	-3.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.21%	-10.14%	+3.93%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.39%	-0.65%	+0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.92%	-1.96%	+0.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.52%	2.59%	-1.07%

Volatility

RSPA vs. EFAA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Income Advantage ETF (RSPA) is 2.00%, while Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) has a volatility of 3.45%. This indicates that RSPA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EFAA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSPA	EFAA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.00%	3.45%	-1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.74%	10.83%	-4.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.53%	12.45%	-2.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.68%	13.02%	-0.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.68%	13.02%	-0.34%

RSPA vs. EFAA - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPA has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than EFAA's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSPA vs. EFAA - Dividend Comparison

RSPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.93%, more than EFAA's 8.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
EFAA Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF	8.11%	7.94%	3.29%
RSPA Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Income Advantage ETF	8.93%	9.14%	4.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSPA and EFAA in my portfolio?

RSPA and EFAA have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSPA or EFAA?

EFAA has higher volatility (3.45%) compared to RSPA (2.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPA dropped -15.37% vs EFAA's -11.97%.

Which ETF is better, RSPA or EFAA?

On 1-year performance, EFAA leads with 21.12% vs 19.71% for RSPA. On fees, RSPA is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, RSPA has been the lower-risk option at 2.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSPA or EFAA?

Over the 1-year period, EFAA has performed better with a 21.12% return vs 19.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSPA or EFAA?

RSPA is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EFAA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSPA or EFAA?

RSPA has the higher dividend yield at 8.93%, compared with 8.11% for EFAA.

What is the main difference between RSPA and EFAA?

RSPA is categorized as S&P 500, while EFAA is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for RSPA and 0.39% for EFAA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 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.