RSPG vs. MGNR
RSPG (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF) and MGNR (American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. RSPG is passively managed, while MGNR is actively managed. Over the past year, RSPG returned 47.49% vs 74.12% for MGNR. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RSPG charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for MGNR.
Performance
RSPG vs. MGNR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RSPG achieves a 34.27% return, which is significantly higher than MGNR's 25.90% return.
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%
MGNR
- 1D
- -1.76%
- 1M
- 3.52%
- YTD
- 25.90%
- 6M
- 27.71%
- 1Y
- 74.12%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RSPG vs. MGNR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF | 34.27% | 7.01% | 8.96% |
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF | 25.90% | 50.57% | 22.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between RSPG and MGNR is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2024 | 0.45 |
The correlation between RSPG and MGNR shifts across timeframes, from 0.25 (1 year) to 0.45 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
RSPG vs. MGNR — Risk / Return Rank
RSPG
MGNR
RSPG vs. MGNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) and American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR). 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.
| RSPG | MGNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.03 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.98 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.53 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.92 | 6.02 | -2.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.59 | 24.36 | -12.77 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RSPG | MGNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.20 | 3.24 | -1.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.29 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.18 | 1.77 | -1.59 |
Drawdowns
RSPG vs. MGNR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RSPG drawdown since its inception was -79.98%, which is greater than MGNR's maximum drawdown of -22.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPG and MGNR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RSPG | MGNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.98% | -22.06% | -57.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.18% | -12.38% | +0.20% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.06% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.44% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -73.17% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.67% | -1.76% | -3.91% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.47% | -3.86% | -21.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.11% | 3.05% | +1.06% |
Volatility
RSPG vs. MGNR - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) has a higher volatility of 8.19% compared to American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR) at 6.59%. This indicates that RSPG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MGNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RSPG | MGNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.19% | 6.59% | +1.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.77% | 17.67% | -0.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.69% | 23.04% | -1.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.31% | 25.03% | +3.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 33.57% | 25.03% | +8.54% |
RSPG vs. MGNR - Expense Ratio Comparison
RSPG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than MGNR's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
RSPG vs. MGNR - Dividend Comparison
RSPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, more than MGNR's 1.07% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF | 1.07% | 1.17% | 0.79% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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
RSPG and MGNR have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RSPG has higher volatility (8.19%) compared to MGNR (6.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPG dropped -79.98% vs MGNR's -22.06%.
On 1-year performance, MGNR leads with 74.12% vs 47.49% for RSPG. On fees, RSPG is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, MGNR has been the lower-risk option at 6.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MGNR has performed better with a 74.12% return vs 47.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RSPG is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MGNR.
RSPG has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 1.07% for MGNR.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and American Beacon. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPG and 0.75% for MGNR.
MGNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.24 vs 2.20), 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.
Find the right allocation for RSPG and MGNR
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