RSPE vs. BUFP

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

RSPE (Invesco ESG S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF) and BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSPE is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Equal Weight ESG Leaders Select Index, while BUFP is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RSPE returned 27.64% vs 14.81% for BUFP. Their 0.75 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RSPE charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for BUFP.

Performance

RSPE vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco ESG S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSPE) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPE achieves a 16.35% return, which is significantly higher than BUFP's 7.65% return.

RSPE

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 0.61%
• 6M: 11.63%
• YTD: 16.35%
• 1Y: 27.64%
• 3Y*: 15.88%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.99%

BUFP

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: 1.19%
• 6M: 6.45%
• YTD: 7.65%
• 1Y: 14.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.74%

*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)
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	$1.05M	$1.21M	$1.54M
RSPE Invesco ESG S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF	$309.58K	$266.66K	$342.82K

RSPE vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RSPE Invesco ESG S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF	16.35%	14.58%	5.76%
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	7.65%	12.92%	6.30%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPE and BUFP is 0.69, 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.	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2024	0.75

The correlation between RSPE and BUFP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

RSPE vs. BUFP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSPE	BUFP
Technology	17.9%	37.9%
Industrials	17.4%	8.4%
Financial Services	15.5%	11.7%
Healthcare	13.4%	9.1%
Consumer Cyclical	11.1%	9.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	4.6%
Real Estate	6.8%	1.9%
Basic Materials	4.7%	1.7%
Communication Services	3.6%	10.0%
Utilities	2.8%	2.3%
Energy	-	3.0%

Return for Risk

RSPE vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPE

RSPE Risk / Return Rank: 85
RSPE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
RSPE Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
RSPE Omega Ratio Rank: 85
RSPE Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
RSPE Martin Ratio Rank: 85

BUFP

BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 90
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 92
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

RSPE vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco ESG S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSPE) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). 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.

	RSPE	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.21	2.32	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.12	3.44	-0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.47	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.10	3.37	-0.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.61	18.03	-5.41

RSPE vs. BUFP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPE Sharpe Ratio is 2.21, which is comparable to the BUFP Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPE and BUFP, 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

RSPE vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPE drawdown since its inception was -22.93%, which is greater than BUFP's maximum drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPE and BUFP.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSPE	BUFP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.93%	-11.98%	-10.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.95%	-4.41%	-4.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.58%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.26%	0.00%	-0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.86%	-0.97%	-4.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.20%	0.82%	+1.38%

Volatility

RSPE vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison

Invesco ESG S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSPE) has a higher volatility of 2.87% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) at 1.70%. This indicates that RSPE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSPE	BUFP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.87%	1.70%	+1.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.26%	5.24%	+4.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.62%	6.44%	+6.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.60%	9.30%	+7.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.60%	9.30%	+7.30%

RSPE vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPE has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSPE vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison

RSPE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, more than BUFP's 0.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RSPE Invesco ESG S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF	1.44%	1.63%	1.57%	1.91%	1.83%	0.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSPE and BUFP in my portfolio?

RSPE and BUFP have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSPE or BUFP?

RSPE has higher volatility (2.87%) compared to BUFP (1.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPE dropped -22.93% vs BUFP's -11.98%.

Which ETF is better, RSPE or BUFP?

On 1-year performance, RSPE leads with 27.64% vs 14.81% for BUFP. On fees, RSPE is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, BUFP has been the lower-risk option at 1.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSPE or BUFP?

Over the 1-year period, RSPE has performed better with a 27.64% return vs 14.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSPE or BUFP?

RSPE is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BUFP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSPE or BUFP?

RSPE has the higher dividend yield at 1.44%, compared with 0.01% for BUFP.

What is the main difference between RSPE and BUFP?

RSPE is categorized as S&P 500, while BUFP is Defined Outcome. RSPE tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight ESG Leaders Select Index, while BUFP tracks S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for RSPE and 0.50% for BUFP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 2.21), 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.