PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RSPG vs. MLPX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RSPG vs. MLPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) and Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RSPG having a 25.57% return and MLPX slightly lower at 25.35%. Over the past 10 years, RSPG has underperformed MLPX with an annualized return of 8.92%, while MLPX has yielded a comparatively higher 12.45% annualized return.


RSPG

1D
0.47%
1M
-7.91%
YTD
25.57%
6M
25.75%
1Y
34.94%
3Y*
17.99%
5Y*
19.92%
10Y*
8.92%

MLPX

1D
1.68%
1M
-3.98%
YTD
25.35%
6M
25.51%
1Y
27.11%
3Y*
29.56%
5Y*
21.27%
10Y*
12.45%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RSPG vs. MLPX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RSPG
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF
25.57%7.01%6.09%4.49%57.97%57.73%-32.44%13.38%-24.68%-6.39%
MLPX
Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF
25.35%4.96%42.90%15.77%21.54%39.63%-20.32%19.04%-15.64%-4.53%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPG and MLPX is 0.67, 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

0.67

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

0.72

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

0.80

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

0.81

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 7, 2013

0.81

The correlation between RSPG and MLPX shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (1 year) to 0.81 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RSPG vs. MLPX - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RSPG
MLPX

Energy

100.0%
99.5%

Financial Services

0.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

0.3%

Energy

RSPG
100.0%
MLPX
99.5%

Financial Services

RSPG
0.0%
MLPX

-

Basic Materials

RSPG

-

MLPX

-

Communication Services

RSPG

-

MLPX

-

Consumer Cyclical

RSPG

-

MLPX

-

Consumer Defensive

RSPG

-

MLPX

-

Healthcare

RSPG

-

MLPX

-

Industrials

RSPG

-

MLPX

-

Real Estate

RSPG

-

MLPX

-

Technology

RSPG

-

MLPX

-

Utilities

RSPG

-

MLPX
0.3%

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. MLPX — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPG
RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank

MLPX
MLPX Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
MLPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MLPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
MLPX Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
MLPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
MLPX Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
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.

RSPG vs. MLPX - 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 Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX). 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.


RSPGMLPXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.30

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.56

3.33

-0.77

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.56

8.00

-0.43

RSPG vs. MLPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPG Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is comparable to the MLPX Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPG and MLPX, 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...

Drawdowns

RSPG vs. MLPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPG drawdown since its inception was -79.98%, which is greater than MLPX's maximum drawdown of -70.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPG and MLPX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RSPGMLPXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-79.98%

-70.67%

-9.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.72%

-8.18%

-5.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.06%

-16.77%

-6.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.44%

-19.72%

-8.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.17%

-64.70%

-8.47%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.78%

-4.34%

-7.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-25.42%

-16.58%

-8.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.63%

3.40%

+1.23%

Volatility

RSPG vs. MLPX - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) has a higher volatility of 7.22% compared to Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) at 5.80%. This indicates that RSPG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MLPX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RSPGMLPXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.22%

5.80%

+1.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.83%

11.78%

+5.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.09%

15.43%

+6.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.25%

19.99%

+8.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.53%

26.47%

+7.06%

RSPG vs. MLPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPX's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

RSPG vs. MLPX - Dividend Comparison

RSPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, less than MLPX's 4.09% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MLPX
Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF
4.09%4.88%4.30%5.22%5.23%5.98%8.32%5.78%5.77%4.36%5.50%4.81%
RSPG
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF
2.11%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 MLPX have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RSPG has higher volatility (7.22%) compared to MLPX (5.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPG dropped -79.98% vs MLPX's -70.67%.

On 10-year performance, MLPX leads with 12.45% vs 8.92% for RSPG. On fees, RSPG is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, MLPX has been the lower-risk option at 5.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, MLPX has performed better with a 12.45% return vs 8.92%. 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 0.45% for MLPX.

MLPX has the higher dividend yield at 4.09%, compared with 2.11% for RSPG.

RSPG is categorized as Energy Equities, while MLPX is MLPs. RSPG tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index, while MLPX tracks Solactive MLP & Energy Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPG and 0.45% for MLPX.

MLPX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.61), 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 RSPG and MLPX

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