PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RSPG vs. QVMT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RSPG vs. QVMT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RSPG (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF) and QVMT (Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSPG is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index, while QVMT is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality, Value & Momentum Multi-factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RSPG returned 9.73%/yr vs 13.29%/yr for QVMT. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RSPG charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for QVMT.

Performance

RSPG vs. QVMT - 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 Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF (QVMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPG achieves a 34.27% return, which is significantly higher than QVMT's 17.16% return. Over the past 10 years, RSPG has underperformed QVMT with an annualized return of 9.73%, while QVMT has yielded a comparatively higher 13.29% annualized 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%

QVMT

1D
0.22%
1M
5.11%
YTD
17.16%
6M
19.76%
1Y
34.37%
3Y*
22.66%
5Y*
11.45%
10Y*
13.29%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RSPG vs. QVMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RSPG
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF		34.27%7.01%6.09%4.49%57.97%57.73%-32.44%13.38%-24.68%-6.39%
QVMT
Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF		17.16%19.08%14.40%11.71%-5.61%35.27%-9.98%28.86%-9.51%18.77%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPG and QVMT is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.30

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

0.55

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

0.60

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

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2015

0.60

Over the past year, the correlation between RSPG and QVMT has dropped to 0.30 - well below their long-term average of 0.60, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF

Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF

Often compared with RSPG:
RSPG vs. XLERSPG vs. SCHGRSPG vs. SPYRSPG vs. VDERSPG vs. IUES.LRSPG vs. MLPXRSPG vs. CNRG
Often compared with QVMT:
QVMT vs. SPMOQVMT vs. SPVMQVMT vs. VOOQVMT vs. PBFRQVMT vs. HIBLQVMT vs. XCLRQVMT vs. SPHQ

Return for Risk

RSPG vs. QVMT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RSPG
RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
QVMT
QVMT Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
QVMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QVMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
QVMT Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
QVMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
QVMT Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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. QVMT - 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 Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF (QVMT). 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.

RSPGQVMTDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.20

2.77

-0.57

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.80

3.96

-1.16

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.47

-0.12

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.92

5.52

-1.60

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

11.59

19.63

-8.04

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RSPG vs. QVMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPG Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the QVMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPG and QVMT, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

RSPGQVMTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.20

2.77

-0.57

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

0.67

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

0.63

-0.34

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.18

0.59

-0.41

Drawdowns

RSPG vs. QVMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPG drawdown since its inception was -79.98%, which is greater than QVMT's maximum drawdown of -48.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPG and QVMT.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RSPGQVMTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-79.98%

-48.05%

-31.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.18%

-6.25%

-5.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.06%

-14.42%

-8.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.44%

-21.95%

-6.49%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.17%

-48.05%

-25.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.67%

-0.46%

-5.21%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-25.47%

-6.34%

-19.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

1.76%

+2.35%

Volatility

RSPG vs. QVMT - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) has a higher volatility of 8.19% compared to Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF (QVMT) at 3.13%. This indicates that RSPG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QVMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RSPGQVMTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.19%

3.13%

+5.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.77%

8.96%

+7.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.69%

12.47%

+9.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.31%

17.28%

+11.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.57%

21.08%

+12.49%

RSPG vs. QVMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than QVMT's 0.13% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSPG vs. QVMT - Dividend Comparison

RSPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, less than QVMT's 2.06% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QVMT
Invesco S&P S&P 500 Concentrated QVM ETF		2.06%2.42%2.71%3.05%2.49%2.31%2.70%2.23%2.48%2.37%1.11%0.54%
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 QVMT have a correlation of 0.30, 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 QVMT (3.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPG dropped -79.98% vs QVMT's -48.05%.

On 10-year performance, QVMT leads with 13.29% vs 9.73% for RSPG. On fees, QVMT is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, QVMT has been the lower-risk option at 3.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QVMT has performed better with a 13.29% return vs 9.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QVMT is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPG.

QVMT has the higher dividend yield at 2.06%, compared with 1.94% for RSPG.

RSPG is categorized as Energy Equities, while QVMT is S&P 500. RSPG tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index, while QVMT tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value & Momentum Multi-factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPG and 0.13% for QVMT.

QVMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RSPG and QVMT

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