RSPG vs. RNWZ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RSPG (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF) and RNWZ (TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. RSPG is passively managed, while RNWZ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RSPG returned 19.93%/yr vs 12.63%/yr for RNWZ. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RSPG charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for RNWZ.

Performance

RSPG vs. RNWZ - 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 TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSPG achieves a 34.27% return, which is significantly higher than RNWZ's 16.28% 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%

RNWZ

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: -2.61%
• YTD: 16.28%
• 6M: 16.86%
• 1Y: 38.19%
• 3Y*: 12.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RSPG vs. RNWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	34.27%	7.01%	6.09%	4.49%	6.50%
RNWZ TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF	16.28%	36.33%	-7.36%	-3.89%	-0.19%

Correlation

The correlation between RSPG and RNWZ is 0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2022	0.22

The correlation between RSPG and RNWZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (1 year) to 0.22 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RSPG vs. RNWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSPG	RNWZ
Energy	100.0%	3.8%
Financial Services	0.0%	6.9%
Basic Materials	-	4.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	5.3%
Real Estate	-	3.2%
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	41.0%

Return for Risk

RSPG vs. RNWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPG

RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 64
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 56
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 63

RNWZ

RNWZ Risk / Return Rank: 80
RNWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RNWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
RNWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 76
RNWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
RNWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. RNWZ - 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 TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ). 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	RNWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.20	2.55	-0.34
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.80	3.40	-0.61
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.45	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.92	6.33	-2.42
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.59	15.60	-4.01
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. RNWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSPG Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the RNWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSPG and RNWZ, 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

	RSPG	RNWZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.20	2.55	-0.34
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	0.61	-0.43

Drawdowns

RSPG vs. RNWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSPG drawdown since its inception was -79.98%, which is greater than RNWZ's maximum drawdown of -24.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSPG and RNWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSPG	RNWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.98%	-24.90%	-55.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.18%	-6.06%	-6.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.06%	-24.74%	+1.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.44%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-73.17%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.67%	-4.46%	-1.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.47%	-7.19%	-18.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.11%	2.45%	+1.66%

Volatility

RSPG vs. RNWZ - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) has a higher volatility of 8.19% compared to TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ) at 5.06%. This indicates that RSPG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RNWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSPG	RNWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.19%	5.06%	+3.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.77%	11.86%	+4.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.69%	15.06%	+6.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.31%	16.99%	+11.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.57%	16.99%	+16.58%

RSPG vs. RNWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSPG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than RNWZ's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSPG vs. RNWZ - Dividend Comparison

RSPG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, which matches RNWZ's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RNWZ TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF	1.93%	2.12%	2.36%	3.87%	0.01%	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

Can I hold both RSPG and RNWZ in my portfolio?

RSPG and RNWZ have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSPG or RNWZ?

RSPG has higher volatility (8.19%) compared to RNWZ (5.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSPG dropped -79.98% vs RNWZ's -24.90%.

Which ETF is better, RSPG or RNWZ?

On 3-year performance, RSPG leads with 19.93% vs 12.63% for RNWZ. On fees, RSPG is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, RNWZ has been the lower-risk option at 5.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSPG or RNWZ?

Over the 3-year period, RSPG has performed better with a 19.93% return vs 12.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSPG or RNWZ?

RSPG is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for RNWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSPG or RNWZ?

RSPG and RNWZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.94%.

What is the main difference between RSPG and RNWZ?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and TrueShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for RSPG and 0.75% for RNWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RNWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 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.