RSPF vs. XLF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RSPF (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF) and XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both Financials Equities funds - RSPF tracks the S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Financials -SEC while XLF tracks the Financial Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RSPF returned 11.37%/yr vs 12.38%/yr for XLF. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RSPF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for XLF.

Performance

RSPF vs. XLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF (RSPF) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPF achieves a -5.25% return, which is significantly higher than XLF's -6.64% return. Over the past 10 years, RSPF has underperformed XLF with an annualized return of 11.37%, while XLF has yielded a comparatively higher 12.38% annualized return.

RSPF

• 1D: -1.76%
• 1M: -1.96%
• YTD: -5.25%
• 6M: -2.72%
• 1Y: 2.40%
• 3Y*: 15.99%
• 5Y*: 5.36%
• 10Y*: 11.37%

XLF

• 1D: -1.15%
• 1M: -1.38%
• YTD: -6.64%
• 6M: -4.18%
• 1Y: 1.13%
• 3Y*: 17.64%
• 5Y*: 7.61%
• 10Y*: 12.38%

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

RSPF vs. XLF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RSPF Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF	-5.25%	10.23%	25.75%	6.43%	-10.64%	36.36%	5.49%	31.53%	-15.81%	21.57%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	-6.64%	14.90%	30.56%	12.03%	-10.59%	34.80%	-1.74%	31.88%	-13.06%	22.00%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPF and XLF is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2006	0.89

The correlation between RSPF and XLF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

RSPF vs. XLF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSPF	XLF
Financial Services	92.7%	98.0%
Technology	6.1%	1.8%
Industrials	1.2%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

RSPF vs. XLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPF

RSPF Risk / Return Rank: 10
RSPF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
RSPF Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
RSPF Omega Ratio Rank: 10
RSPF Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
RSPF Martin Ratio Rank: 11

XLF

XLF Risk / Return Rank: 9
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 9
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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.

RSPF vs. XLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF (RSPF) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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.

	RSPF	XLF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.16	0.08	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.32	0.20	+0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.02	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.17	0.08	+0.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.48	0.20	+0.28
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RSPF vs. XLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPF Sharpe Ratio is 0.16, which is higher than the XLF Sharpe Ratio of 0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPF and XLF, 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

	RSPF	XLF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16	0.08	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27	0.41	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	0.56	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.20	+0.01

Drawdowns

RSPF vs. XLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPF drawdown since its inception was -81.32%, roughly equal to the maximum XLF drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPF and XLF.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSPF	XLF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-81.32%	-82.69%	+1.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.13%	-14.79%	+0.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.26%	-15.54%	-2.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.68%	-25.81%	-1.87%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.80%	-42.86%	-1.94%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.99%	-9.34%	+1.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.04%	-20.03%	+0.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.05%	5.66%	-0.61%

Volatility

RSPF vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF (RSPF) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) have volatilities of 3.35% and 3.29%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSPF	XLF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.35%	3.29%	+0.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.17%	10.94%	+0.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.05%	14.41%	+0.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.85%	18.63%	+1.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.91%	22.16%	+0.75%

RSPF vs. XLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than XLF's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSPF vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison

RSPF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, more than XLF's 1.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RSPF Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Financials ETF	1.70%	1.55%	1.65%	2.16%	1.95%	1.56%	2.24%	1.85%	2.51%	1.28%	37.55%	2.17%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	1.56%	1.31%	1.42%	1.71%	2.04%	1.63%	2.03%	1.87%	2.08%	1.48%	21.10%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSPF and XLF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, RSPF and XLF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, RSPF or XLF?

RSPF has higher volatility (3.35%) compared to XLF (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPF dropped -81.32% vs XLF's -82.69%.

Which ETF is better, RSPF or XLF?

On 10-year performance, XLF leads with 12.38% vs 11.37% for RSPF. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSPF or XLF?

Over the 10-year period, XLF has performed better with a 12.38% return vs 11.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSPF or XLF?

XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPF.

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

RSPF has the higher dividend yield at 1.70%, compared with 1.56% for XLF.

What is the main difference between RSPF and XLF?

RSPF tracks S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Financials -SEC, while XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPF and 0.08% for XLF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSPF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.16 vs 0.08), 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.